web analytics
June 25, 2016 / 19 Sivan, 5776

Posts Tagged ‘budget’

Overspending

Thursday, August 1st, 2013

Often one spouse accuses the other of being an over-spender. But what exactly is “overspending”? This definition changes from family to family; for one, going out to eat on a weekly basis may be within their means, while even a periodic coffee may be stretching the resources of another couple. So how does a family determine whether they can afford to eat out?

One cannot “overspend” if there isn’t a budget that defines spending limits. A budget can help reduce friction between spouses who have different spending patterns. If both partners agree to create and abide by a budget, then the one spouse is no longer the “bad cop” that regulates his or her partner’s spending habits.

Spending as an emotional issue

People spend money for a variety of reasons. Some expenses, like groceries and utilities, are a necessity, while others are discretionary. However, even within fixed expenses there is usually room to cut back. Does Shabbat dinner need to be an expensive cut of meat accompanied by costly wine, or will chicken and grape juice suffice?

Examine your fiscal habits. Do you have an idea of how much your monthly expenses are? Where do you spend money? Do you charge or pay in cash? Do you have financial goals that are important to you, and if so, are you actively working to achieve them? How would you feel if your spending habits changed? How would that change affect your spouse/family?

Consider the doctor who tells an overweight patient that unless he lost a considerable amount of weight, he would face serious illness. Chances are, the patient would diet and exercise. So why is there a discrepancy when a financial adviser recommends a fiscal diet and an exercise program of spending within a budget?

Very often, financial issues mask other problems within a relationship. Therefore, creating a budget is not only a good tool to monitor spending, but it can also help improve family harmony.

Doug Goldstein, CFP®

UPDATED: Screams of Rabin Blood Libel after Fake Posting of Lapid as Hitler

Tuesday, June 18th, 2013

Update at the end of the article.

Finance Minister Yair Lapid woke up this morning to find that someone had posted a picture of him dressed as Hitler, one day after the Knesset passed on first reading his proposed budget that includes tax hikes and spending cuts.

Written on the fake picture of Lapid, complete with a Hitler-style moustache, were the words, “Israeli economy’s hateful enemy.”

It is not clear who was behind the prank, but he or she managed to arouse a storm of protest.

“This is shocking,” said public relation official Ran Rahav.

It is shocking indeed, but then he took it to the extreme and started digging up the blood libel against the national religious community following the assassination of Prime Minister Yitzchak Rabin in 1995.

“It is with great sorrow that the whole country has not internalized what happened before 18 years ago, when Yitzchak Rabin was murdered. In those black days before the murder, a picture of Rabin was posted showing him dressed as Hitler.

“I hope the police will immediately arrest whoever carried out this horrible posting against Finance Minister Yair Lapid.”

UPDATE: Numerous bloggers are now saying that they believe that PR official Ran Rahav or an associate of his was involved in creation of the photo, based on the suspicious manner in which Rahav tried to upload and publicize the image.

Years ago, it was exposed that the picture of Yitzchak Rabin in an SS uniform was created and distributed by a Shabak agent.

 

Tzvi Ben-Gedalyahu

Haredi Tycoons Raising $100 Million to Replace Lapid’s Budget Cuts

Tuesday, May 21st, 2013

Haredi tycoons are organizing to fill a $100 million gap for yeshivas following Finance Minister Yair Lapid’s elimination of the same amount of money that yeshivas have been receiving from taxpayers.

The Mishpacha magazine called the tycoon’s fund-raising campaign “a Lapid bypass plan “to help the world of the Torah get through the years of distress with a minimum of harm.”

If it works, everyone wins: The budget will come closer to being in the black, pardon the expression; the vast majority of Israelis will be relieved of blatant government purchases of Haredi votes in return for funding for yeshivas; the Haredi community will be more self-dependent; Torah study can continue; and perhaps the Hardy tycoons that men registered at yeshiva actually learn and do not simply pocket money to sit at home.

Wealthy Haredi businessmen are setting up a special $100 million fund in the next several weeks, according to Mishpacha.

Many of the rich Haredim already have committed large sums of money to replenish the bank accounts of yeshivas and to guarantee income to Torah students.

Another objective is to help encourage employment that is consistent to the Haredi lifestyle, similar to the Agudah communities in the United States.

There is also an initiative to foster employment and training of Haredi women in jobs consistent with the Haredi way of life.

However, the Haredi community has not given up on hopes of going back to the days of government handouts.

It hopes that after the fund runs for approximately 18 months, “the government will be replaced by a government more congenial to the Haredi public,” according to the magazine.

Tzvi Ben-Gedalyahu

Cabinet Passes ‘Austerity Budget’

Tuesday, May 14th, 2013

The Cabinet Monday evening passed a two-year budget, nearly five months late, with tax hikes and across-the-board cuts in spending, Only one minister voted against the  budget, the second and last time it will cover two years instead of one.

Finance Minister Yair Lapid, who is chairman of the Yesh Atid party, said after the vote that the budget is “first stage in changing peoples’ lives in Israel.”

The Value Added Tax on most goods, except food, will rise from 17 percent to 18 percent. Income taxes will rise for upper income families, and ministries will have to get by with last outlays, meaning cuts in services.

Bank of Israel Governor Stanley Fischer announced a surprise quarter-point cut in the interest ate Monday night, two weeks ahead of the end-of-the month decision n whether to change the rate for the following month. He also praised the new budget, which could lead the country out of a huge deficit that has mounted in the past three years following several years of a surplus.

Jewish Press News Briefs

Obama Golfs and Bibi Eats Ice Cream – How Much to Indulge Leaders?

Tuesday, May 14th, 2013

Personal expenses for Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu soared 80 percent in the last year, according to figures that his office were forced to release after it ignored a formal request and acquiesced only after a petition for disclosure was filed in court.

The anti-Netanyahu Israeli press, which is just about all of the local media, jumped on the Prime Minister and his wife Sarah for freely spending the taxpayers’ money at a time when the government is carrying out austerity measures to reduce the budget deficit.

The attacks are somewhat populist, but that does not detract from the fact that some of the Netanyahus’ spending habits are from frugal.

However, compared with President Barack Obama, the Israeli expenditures are peanuts.

Of course, comparing the United States with Israel is like comparing Wyoming with New York, but there also is one other very basic difference: Israel loves to hang out its collective dirty laundry in full view of the public.

The Israeli society is nothing if not open. Thanks to the official list of expenditures, we now know that the Netanyahus spent approximately $40,000 for gardening last year at the family’s official home and two private residences.

Cosmetic and haircut and hairdo expense rose last year from $9,250 to nearly $18,000.

We don’t know how much the White House spent on keeping Obama and Michelle’s hair neat and prim, but you can bet your bottom shekel that $18,000 barely paid for a shave and after-shave.

In Israel, the principle often is more important than the principal, and the public indeed needs a leader who can be an example of a bit of modest spending at a time when the government wants to hike taxes and lower services to the public.

Netanyahu earlier this year was embarrassed by the disclosure that he asked for $2,700 to lap up ice cream, one of his weaknesses. He put a stop to his habit, at least not at the public’s expense.

Last week, he had to order a halt to the use of a special airplane bedroom that was installed for the price of $125,000 when he and his wife flew to Britain for the funeral of Margaret Thatcher. The special room will be removed, except for trans-Atlantic flights.

In the United States, President Obama has been has attacked for his costly habit of playing golf. His recent outing with Tiger Woods cost $78,000 just for security.

ABC’s Jonathan Karl asked White House Press Secretary Jay Carney how much is spent for President Obama’s golf tours?

“Well, the president is the President of the United States,” Carney replied. “And he is elected to represent all of the people. And he travels around the country, appropriately. I don’t have a figure on the cost of presidential travel. It is obviously something, as every President deals with because of security and staff, a significant undertaking. But the President has to travel around the country. He has to travel around the world. That is part of his job.”

“How much does it cost for him to go and play golf?” Karl insisted.

Carney never answered the question.

The large outlay for political leaders’ quirks raises the question of how much they need to be pampered to keep from collapsing under the strain of public office.

“Bibi is king, and in a monarchy, when the king and queen fly, price is no object,” political commentator Sima Kadmon wrote in Israel’s Yediot Acharonot.

The president’s total impersonal expenditures are estimated at $1.4 billion a year, and that more or less is the same level of spending in the Bush administration.

But there is a limit, morally. Can Prime Minister Netanyahu function without so much ice cream, even without taking into account that he can do without the calories?

And does the White House really have to spend more than $250,000 a year on flowers, the figure that is an official government statistic?

Battering Netanyahu is popular and often justified, and the results are positive. Bedroom flights to Europe have been scrapped, and the ice cream budget has melted.

Now let’s see if Obama starts playing less golf.

Tzvi Ben-Gedalyahu

Lapid’s Marie Antoinette-Style Budget

Monday, May 13th, 2013

There isn’t much  good I can say about our new finance minister’s budget, except that Yair Lapid has a lot of guts.  There’s hardly anyone, especially among those who voted for him, who likes and agrees with Lapid’s first budget.  I agree with the detractors here.  This budget makes no sense to me.

In terms of the cuts in the military, it’s outrageous, ridiculous and dangerous.   On one hand Lapid and the Israeli government still say that they want to draft pretty  much all the Haredi men, claiming the army needs them, but if the military budget is reduced, there won’t be money for that.  And that’s one of the simpler points to ponder.

With a vote in the full cabinet expected Monday on Finance Minister Yair Lapid’s budget proposal for 2013- 2014, the security cabinet met throughout the day Sunday and into the night to parse out NIS 4 billion in proposed cuts to defense spending.

I agree with Professor Ron Breiman that reducing army service will only endanger us:

Only once before in Israeli history has a similar measure been taken, and only two draft classes were able to enjoy it. I’m talking about those who were drafted in August and November of 1964 and served only two years and two months. Not long after, the quiet along Israel’s borders, since 1956, was broken and the winds of war began to blow from Egypt, Syria and Jordan. The result was the Six-Day War in 1967.
In the years following the Six-Day War — the years of the War of Attrition, the Yom Kippur War, the First Lebanon War — it was clear to everyone that there was no choice but to maintain the three-year mandatory service policy. Only in the 1990s , when the bells of “peace” rang in “the new Middle East” did country’s leaders think again about shortening military service. This time, however, the easing of the security burden was directed at the reserve army, not towards changing the three-year mandatory service policy. The reserve service cut-off was lowered to 40 years of age, the need to receive a permit for travelling abroad was cancelled, and more.

It will make a much less professional and competent IDF.

I call it a Marie Antionette budget, because it harms the poor more than the rich.  In a rare instance, I agree with Labor’s  Shelly Yacimovich.

According to her figures, after factoring in tax changes, price increases, National Insurance Institute child allotments and so forth, the bottom 10 percent of Israelis would lose a whopping 25.1% of their income while the richest decile would only lose 2.2%. The majority of the changes stemmed from proposed reductions in child allotments. “A picture arises of a heavy burden from difficult, regressive, non-egalitarian cuts that clearly hurt the poor and middle classes, primarily, and hardly touch the rich,” Yacimovich said.

I work in one of those minimum wage jobs, and none of us have any “fat” to trim from our budgets.  So, big deal if the wealthier will take fewer trips abroad or keep their cars a year or two longer.  For many of us those sorts of luxuries are just dreams.

Visit Shiloh Musings.

Batya Medad

ObamaCare: Don’t Believe Gov’t Projections

Wednesday, May 8th, 2013

At a recent press conference, President Obama delivered a reassuring announcement to the millions of Americans who are wary of the upcoming deluge of ObamaCare’s full implementation: “For the average American out there, for the 85 and 90 percent of Americans who already have health insurance, this thing’s already happened. And their only impact is that their insurance is stronger, better and more secure than it was before. Full stop. That’s it. They don’t have to worry about anything else.”

Well.  “Full stop.”  So that solves it.  Is everyone happy now?

The theatrics from the president are appreciated; they lighten the mood a bit.  But they’ll fall short when you don’t have health insurance and are faced with either being uninsured or joining the Medicaid rolls.  “Full stop” is actually less of an authoritative command than an indication of what will happen to many people’s insurance coverage once ObamaCare is fully implemented.  As the Wall Street Journal pointed out earlier this year, the entirety of ObamaCare’s regulatory framework will likely raise premiums in thirteen states “somewhere between 65% and 100%.”  This includes my home state of Virginia, which, even at the lowest end of the scale, would find me paying a little over $250 a month for health insurance after ObamaCare goes into high gear.  “Full stop” is what will then occur with my premium payments; but once I cancel the plan, I won’t have to worry about anything else.  So it turns out that the president is partly right.

It’s instructive to witness the inability of politicians to accurately predict their own legislative outcomes.  In 1967, Congress predicted that Medicare spending would equal only $12 billion per year by 1990 — a paltry sum.  Actual spending for that year was $110 billion, so they were slightly off the mark.  But of course, by that point, Medicare was fully entrenched in the American political system, and the notion of even modestly reforming it was off the table (it evidently continues to be off the table today).  Thus stands the ossified character of American government, and thus will likely stand ObamaCare twenty-five years from now, too.  Full stop.

It’s not just the left of the political spectrum that has dismal results in predicting its own spending habits.  Years ago, Donald Rumsfeld and the Pentagon predicted that the Iraq war would cost between $2 billion and $4 billion a month.  The actual result was nearly $8 billion a month.  Rumsfeld also expressed doubt that the war would last even six months.  Well, it lasted a little longer than that; coupled with the grossly underestimated price tag, we’ve spent a lot more in Iraq than we thought we would, and for a much longer time than we thought we would have to.  So the government is as bad at predicting outcomes of war as it is at predicting outlays of medical spending.

Even the so-called nonpartisan government officials (an hilarious paradoxical idea, but we’ll allow it) aren’t good at the business of fortune-telling.  The CBO estimated in 1999 that the federal government would have a budget surplus of $388 billion in 2009, ten years down the road.  The actual number was somewhat closer to adeficit of one-and-a-half trillion dollars.  Ah, well, it’s a simple matter of arithmetic.  And in any case, the report had its bases (or its baseline, if you like) covered: “CBO’s economic projections assume that no legislative action is taken that would affect the projections of revenue and spending.”  So that’s all it takes!

The history of dismal government projections should be sobering for the politicians we elect to represent us.  The Great Society legislators were all but certain that their old-age insurance program would be manageable and prudent; it now stands as perhaps the chief threat to the financial stability of the United States government.  Decades later, our leaders thought we could be in and out of the Middle East in half a year, tops — yet there are children in this country who know nothing other than the reality of our country’s being at war with Iraq.  A hundred other examples of failed conjecture are readily available.  And still there is a political class that believes that it can enact massive pieces of legislation and accurately predict how they will end up.

So who believes President Obama regarding ObamaCare, anyway?  Ditto Nancy Pelosi, who even openly confessed to not knowing the bill’s contents when she voted for its passage.  Ditto everyone who continues to support the behemoth law as it trudges towards full implementation.

Daniel Payne

Printed from: http://www.jewishpress.com/indepth/opinions/obamacare-dont-believe-govt-projections/2013/05/08/

Scan this QR code to visit this page online: