Year: 2020

Eretz Yisrael: More Helpful Than Polite!

Hashem Led The Way

Haaretz Hatovah

Real Life Stories and Experiences of Yidden Settling in Eretz Yisroel.

Our Aliyah story is a bit different than others. I guess I can say that we clearly saw Hashem leading us here, as it was not something that was on our radar screen at all. I grew up in Pittsburgh and after marriage moved to Lakewood where my husband learned in Kollel while I worked. As our family grew, so did our appreciation of family relationships, but it was all long-distance and infrequent visits; I did not have married siblings at the time, and my parents were out of the way in Pittsburgh. My husband’s family, however, had all made Aliyah, and by the time we had four children we made up our minds – we wanted to be near them. We considered the pros and cons, and decided that as long as I would be able to find a job, we could put it together. Happily, my boss told me I could continue my computer programming position with them while living in Eretz Yisroel. I didn’t worry further as I knew that many have such arrangements.

We contacted Nefesh b’Nefesh and although they were very helpful, there was still plenty for us to do. We made a pilot trip, which also served as a job hunt because the day after we sent our lift, I was told that unfortunately, I would not be able to work long distance after all! I made many inquiries, and although I did not get a solid job offer, we were still ready to come and count on Hashem’s continued guidance. The next few weeks were a flurry of shopping, packing, and paperwork. We arrived at the airport with 18 suitcases, 6 carry-ons and 6 personal bags! BH our flight went well, and we really appreciated the NBN welcome committee at the airport! Equally impressive was the welcome we enjoyed from neighbors and family. Our apartment wasn’t ready, and amazingly a neighbor we only met when we arrived offered to store our luggage in their apartment. We spent the next couple of days with a sister-in-law, and then began getting furniture and appliances, with the guidance and advice of many.

Pesach was a beautiful Yom Tov spent with family, and shortly thereafter we were zocheh to my getting offered a great job! My employer heard about me through Nefesh b’Nefesh, and their office is a 20-30 minute drive from my home. It is a frum company doing legal transcription; although they employ many legal transcribers who work from home, there is a pleasant office atmosphere.

We’ve been living in Kiryat Sefer for nearly four years. When we came, our b’chor – almost six – began Mechina (precedes first grade); BH he did fine, although he benefited from some tutoring the following year. The younger ones needed even less adjusting; they love school and by now speak to me in Ivrit. I get by, my Ivrit is good enough for figuring out all the bureaucratic stuff and learning how to shop. One thing that makes my life easier is having a car – I need one to get to my job, as that route is not part of the regular bus service. My husband learns in a kollel, and he appreciates the variety in learning styles, and the many kollelim from which to choose. When we first came, he joined the kollel his brother-in-law was in and it was a good starting place. After a while , with the help of friends, he found a kollel more suited to his needs and BH he is shteiging well.

Socially, I love it. We can go to the park almost every day, and have a choice of several within a five-ten minute walk from our home. There are many nice and friendly neighbors, as well as an English speaking young Neshei – their meetings helped me meet other Americans so I have both Israeli and chutznik friends. They welcomed us and invited us to their homes for Shabbos, and after I had a baby they organized meals! Getting together with family for Bar Mitzvas, Yomim Tovim and chofesh is a delight. We very much enjoy the cousins growing up together. And icing on the cake… my brothers learning in yeshiva come to visit! However, I must admit that I see that for people who don’t have family here it is a big mesirus nefesh.

Another attraction: here in Eretz Yisroel they really care. Even birthing is a family/friendly experience. In hospitals in America, you are isolated in your room and you are offered meals, medicine, etc. Here you eat together in a dining room and although you must go to the nurses for what you need, there is more simcha and understanding – and of course fresh kosher food is great! Much of the staff is frum and I found them to be competent, understanding. If you come to an appointment late, they may yell but you will get what you need, versus in America, they are very polite but not very helpful.

To sum up, here I can take advantage of the ruchnius all around, living in a wonderfully inspiring frum community, with classes, and events for women. While it certainly took strength and support from the community and family, it has truly been a wonderful move for us.

-Shoshana Zimmerman – Kiryat Sefer

Written By Tova Younger

This article is part of our Haaretz Hatovah series featuring Yidden living in, settling, and building up Eretz Yisroel. For more info please contact info@naavakodesh.org or visit naavakodesh.org/haaretz-hatovah

From Naava Kodesh, here.

נטיעת עצים בא”י מקרבת את הגאולה

מצוות נטיעת אילנות בארץ ישראל

מצווה לטעת עצי פרי בארץ ישראל. בנטיעה יש כמה מצוות, בנוסף למצוות ישוב ארץ ישראל. נטיעת חמשה אילנות מאכל בארץ ישראל פוטרת את הנוטע מלצאת למלחמה, עד סוף השנה הרביעית. נטיעת עצים בארץ ישראל מהווים את אחד מסימני הגאולה.

מקורות

בפרשת קדושים (ויקרא יט, כג) נאמר “וְכִי תָבֹאוּ אֶל הָאָרֶץ וּנְטַעְתֶּם כָּל עֵץ מַאֲכָל”. חז”ל במדרש דייקו מייתור המילה ונטעתם, ולא כתוב רק שלוש שנים יהיה לכם ערלים, ללמד שיש מצווה לטעם עצים בארץ ישראל[1].

במדרש מסופר שמשה רבינו ציווה את עם ישראל הנכנסים לארץ, לקחת מעדר ולטעת עצים. וז”ל “כיון שנכנסו ישראל לארץ אמר להם משה כל אחד ואחד מכם יטעון מכושיה ויפוק וינצוב ליה נציבין הה”ד כי תבאו אל הארץ ונטעתם “[2].

כל זה בנוסף למצוות יישוב ארץ ישראל שיש בזה, כמבואר בגמ’ (ב”מ קא, ב) ונפסק בשו”ע (חו”מ קס”ח, א) שיש בנטיעת עצים מצוות ישוב ארץ ישראל.

כך גם נאמר במדרש שה’ מצווה את יצחק אבינו להתיישב בארץ ולטעת בה עצים. על הפסוק “וַיְהִי רָעָב בָּאָרֶץ… וַיֵּלֶךְ יִצְחָק אֶל אֲבִימֶלֶךְ מֶלֶךְ פְּלִשְׁתִּים גְּרָרָה: וַיֵּרָא אֵלָיו יְיָ וַיֹּאמֶר אַל תֵּרֵד מִצְרָיְמָה שְׁכֹן בָּאָרֶץ אֲשֶׁר אֹמַר אֵלֶיךָ”[3]. אמרו במדרש שכן בארץ – עשה שכונה בארץ זרע ונטע אילנות[4]:

המשך לקרוא…

מאתר המכלול, כאן.

Against Government Funding of Science – The Facts

Scientific Research by Terence Kealey

The Market Outperforms Statist Alternatives in Science, Too
Wednesday, October 1, 1997
George C. Leef

New York: St. Martin’s Press • 1996 • 396 pages • $75.00 cloth; $19.95 paperback

Americans have come to accept that a vast number of important functions can only be done if they are run by or at least subsidized by the state. According to conventional wisdom, government has to provide lighthouses, bus service, income security, schools, disaster relief, and much more. To that list we should add scientific research. Scientific research, it is generally assumed, is a “public good” that would be underprovided if left up to the market. Therefore, the government needs to supply enough funds to make sure that we don’t miss out on scientific breakthroughs.

Like much that passes for conventional wisdom, this belief is mistaken, so argues Terence Kealey in The Economic Laws of Scientific Research. Kealey, a clinical biochemist at Cambridge University, has penned a thought-provoking book that blends economic theory with the history of science to challenge the idea that we need or even benefit from government support for scientific research. It is a book that buttresses free-market theoreticians, who will no longer have to say, “Well, in theory, there is no reason to believe that we need to subsidize scientific research.” Kealey’s book gives us a detailed treatment of the issue that should prove to be extremely valuable in arguing against this use of tax dollars.

Government funding of science turns out to be no better than government funding of business; the political system can no more pick winners and losers in scientific research than it can in markets for goods and services. A case in point: In 1833, Charles Babbage came up with an idea for a mechanical computing device, and managed to persuade the British government to give him P17,000 for the construction of his so-called “Difference Engine.” After squandering the funds and having produced nothing, Babbage asked the government for more money for a different project, his “Analytical Engine.” When it denied his request, he denounced the government for its “indifference toward science.” Twenty years later, two Swedish engineers managed to build the “Difference Engine” with a grant of less than 5 percent of what Babbage spent. But they found that there was no market for the invention. Politicized science turns out to be just as wasteful as politicized housing, education, transportation, or anything else.

But if government doesn’t fund scientific research, won’t the “free rider” effect kick in and give us too little science? Won’t organizations sit back and wait for others to undertake the basic research and then jump in to capitalize on it, getting a “free ride”? Like other claimed “free rider” problems that ostensibly call for some coercive “solution,” the supposed need for government involvement in science disappears upon close examination. Kealey argues that scientific knowledge is never free. A firm can’t keep up with, much less utilize current science unless it maintains a scientific staff that is working in the field. And there is no more need for the state to subsidize a firm’s costs of acquiring scientific knowledge that might prove profitable than there is for it to subsidize the acquisition of any other kind of useful knowledge.

Moreover, the author argues, government funding of science may well be a negative-sum game. Governmental money does not augment private scientific spending; it replaces it, often at more than a one-to-one ratio. Thus, we get less scientific research that someone thought held enough promise to justify voluntary expenditure (i.e., was expected to pass the test of the market) and more scientific research of the sort that appeals to federal grant administrators. That is a bad trade-off indeed.

The Economic Laws of Scientific Research also obliterates the “market failure” argument used to justify government intervention. There is no defect in the market for scientific information that requires us to tax the populace, send money off to Washington, and then rely on bureaucratic granting agencies to make the optimal use of it by shipping it off to scientists who want support. We would be better off if we took the government out of the loop.

Terence Kealey has written a witty, well-argued book showing for the nth time that the market outperforms its statist alternative. An excellent addition to the literature of market success and government failure.

George C. Leef

George Leef is the former book review editor of The Freeman. He is director of research at the John W. Pope Center for Higher Education Policy.

From FEE, here.