Forum Replies Created
-
Posts
-
It’s not fraud, if the state is willing to give the money, but will do so only if it’s called “lunch money” and THEY KNOW it’s more than lunch cost, it’s not fraud.
Actually, that’s the very definition of fraud.
laws are manipulated like that all the time. (and i don’t even like that word, it’s more like finding a loophole to make something work, and again it happens all the time)
Care to give some of those examples?
the constitution says there should be a separation of church and state, why is the federal government close for a christian holiday?? are they breaking the law?
Good question. I’ll have to research it. I’m almost positive someone must have filed suit on the matter.
How did NYC open an Arab public school with our tax money?
Because “Arab” is not a religion. Just like the Hebrew culture school on Kings Highway. Arab culture and Hebrew culture are taught at those school. Islam and Judaism are not.
maybe that’s another solution have the state build a public school, where we’ll send our kids, have them pay the full cost, and we will rent the building for a few hours a day for anything we want, which will happen to be religious studies.
Don’t know if that’s legal. Yeah, I know… everything is legal to you if you push enough.
The Wolf
what’s mind boggling is how little you seem to know about politics and life. if there was a meeting between the state and local yeshivas, and the state was convinced they want to help us with tuition, (not that they should or have to, again my point is if they wanted to help us they can) they will say OK I’m sold, but we have a legal issue, the yeshivas can say (this is one of a hundred ideas) we will have 2 schools both renting space from a 3rd entity (a church can rent space from you, doesn’t mean you own a church or that you’re a priest)now the state is helping ONLY a secular school with no religious affiliation!!
That subterfuge is even sillier than the previous one. It doesn’t matter whom you rent space from. A secular school can rent space from a church and be funded by the state. The only two things that prohibit state funding are if religion is taught or if the school is controlled by a religious institution. Whom you rent space from is really irrelevant.
But, hey, let’s take this a bit further and say that it works. Let’s say the politicians decide to do it and let’s say that no disgruntled taxpayers file suit to stop the payments. Great — you now have two schools — a yeshiva and a secular school which is not run or controlled by a religious institution. Now what do you do when a group of Catholics want to enroll in your secular school (but not in your yeshiva)? How are you going to keep them out? Or will you admit them?
it actually does, take your head out of the sand and you’ll see the government can and does do as it pleases, it bends laws, it breaks laws, it changes them as it pleases. welcome to politics, but it is what it is!
Frankly, your assertion here is just mind-boggling. You are, in essence, accusing just about every politician of corruption. So why even have a constitution then? Why even have laws?
The fact of the matter is that the state cannot violate it’s own Constitution. If it does, it will be sued and the courts will force it to abide by the constitution. That’s the way it works, despite your assertion to the contrary. What prevents New York (or any other jurisdiction) from simply outlawing Judaism? The constitutional protections. What prevents a cop from just breaking into your home and searching for evidence of a crime without a warrant*? The Constitution. Believe it or not, it does work.
I guess at this point we simply have to agree to disagree. You believe that we live in anarchy, where laws can be ignored willy-nilly and that politicians are free to do whatever they conceive of without consequence or reprisal from authorities or the voters. I believe we live in a society with laws and order. Are there some people in government who are corrupt as you pointed out? Sure there are, but they don’t represent the system as a whole.
You seem to believe that it’s okay to engage in dishonesty and chicanery to get what you want from the government. You have no problem with creating “secular” schools which are really controlled by religious authorities. You have no problem with government giving tens of millions of dollars as “lunch money” when it’s clearly for something else. I believe in honesty and being above-board. I believe in being up-front with the tax payers about what they are paying for. If they’re paying for tuition for religious schools, then label it as such.
Lastly, I’m fairly certain that you are inconsistent. You would have no problem with the state government ignoring the Blaine Amendment, but at the same time you would scream bloody murder if the Federal government simply ignored the Freedom of Religion clause and said “all Jews get out.” I have a problem with that. I believe government should be consistent.
The Wolf
* Yes, it won’t actually stop the cop from busting in, but it will cause any evidence that they collect in that raid to be inadmissible in court.
Your second post came in while I was composing this, so I didn’t address those points in this post. I will do so in the next post.
[em]this will show up in italics[/em]
Replace the “[” with “<“
Replace the “]” with “>”
The Wolf
let me ask you- what is worse, holding a cell phone in your hand, or having a dog on your lap while driving?!?
Does it matter? Each “infraction” should be judged on it’s own merits, not based on how it relates to other offenses. Just because driving with your dog on your lap is legal doesn’t mean that looking at your cell phone while driving should be legal. Perhaps they should *both* be illegal — and the only reason dog lapping while driving hasn’t been banned yet is because there aren’t enough incidences of it to warrant serious attention.
The Wolf
Chesedname,
Please learn to use the em tag, or at least quotation marks. It’s very difficult to read your posts where your quotation of me just blends into your own remarks.
That being said…
the reason no school is doing it, comes back to my point because the state is not looking to help yeshivas, if they wanted to this could be one of many ways to do it.
You seem to think that splitting the yeshivas up into two schools is somehow the government’s responsibility. It’s not. If a yeshiva wants to try this to get around the state constitution, then they are free to try. No one at the state level is stopping them from splitting their schools in two.
The reason they aren’t doing it is because they can actually the constitution for themselves and see that even a secular school that is owned by a religious organization is ineligible for state funding. Your refusal to see this point is most mind-boggling. You seem to think that if the state wanted to, it could simply wish away the Blaine amendment. But government doesn’t work that way — despite your assertions to the contrary.
really? hmmm guess what yeshivas currently get lunch money, and computer money, and book money, and bus money. the reality is we do get millions, just not enough that parents don’t have to pay twice, once as a tax and again to yeshivas.
Do they? If so, I’d be willing to bet dollars to donuts that the money comes from Federal programs, not state programs (aside from transportation which is specifically exempted from the Blaine Amendment). The state is not giving “millions” to the schools for these programs.
You seem to have this problem of conflating the federal and state governments as if they were one entity. They’re two completely separate forms of government. The Blaine Amendment doesn’t prohibit the feds from giving money for certain programs. It does prohibit the state. Got it?
the fact that the state is broke is a silly argument, I’m talking about a general lack of interest on the states part to help with private tuition for many years, they said no when they had millions of extra dollars. so to say today well their broke, that’s not why it won’t work.
No, the fact that the state is broke is a *very* good argument. If you want the state to kick in money now, then you have to deal with the reality as it is now.
That aside, the voters of New York put the Blaine Amendment into the Constitution. If you want it removed, you have to appeal to the legislators and the voters. That’s the way it works, despite your assertions to the contrary. That’s the democratic process.
However, all is not lost. If you want funding for religious schools from the state, there is a way to do it. Call your legislators. Have an amendment to the state constitution passed. Appeal to the voters and have them vote on it. It’s that simple.
Frankly, your suggestions and comments that we should have the state pay for yeshivos through subterfuge, chicanery and outright fraud (calling money clearly meant for tuition relief “lunch money”) are very disturbing to me. Your complete lack of respect for the rule of law and your lack of understanding of state and federal government workings (such as suggesting that the state government could just ignore the Blaine Amendment if it wanted to) is also troubling.
The Wolf
The main point I was making, and still trying to make, is we don’t get money because they don’t want to give it, not because it’s illegal.
No, you’re wrong.
You provided several “solutions” that are unworkable because they are illegal, politically or religiously impossible or just plain deceitful.
- You proposed that the frum community flood the public schools to force a change in the law. I showed that that was just not going to happen.
- You proposed that we change the Constitution without a vote. Illegal.
- You proposed that yeshivas separate into two schools. No one’s stopping them, but if the “secular school” is owned by a religious institution, then the same problem remains.
- You proposed that yeshivas get the money under false pretenses. Illegal.
You proposed that the state give tax credits for private school. Politically difficult in good times; near impossible when the state is broke.
- You proposed that we be given federal tax credits as the Scientologists are given. I’m not convinced that they are given these credits (I’ve quoted the relevant IRS Revenue Rulings above). Even the report you quoted says that they may get these credits, not that they are actually receiving them. First please show how (based on IRS Revenue Ruling 93-73, which *you* first quoted) Scientologists get these credits before complaining that no one else gets them first.
The Wolf
Can you explain how that comes out of Revenue Ruling 93-73 when I’ve quoted the entire ruling in full?
As far as NY state law, there are ways around everything, I don’t know why you’re not getting it. If NYS wanted to give us money, there are a million way they can.
1) Change the law without a vote, not every law needs a vote.
It’s not a law — it’s a part of the Constitution. There is a prescribed method to amend the Constitution. You can’t just say “let’s change it” without a vote, despite your assertion to the contrary.
2) Make 2 seperate schools one is religous one is not, I mentioned this before you chose to ignore it.
I didn’t ignore it. The state isn’t stopping any yeshiva from doing this. If it’s such a good idea, how come not a single yeshiva has done it? Perhaps because the amendment applies not only to schools that teach religion but also to any school (even a secular one) that is owned by a religious institution.
3) Call it “lunch” money or “computers” or pay 4k per child for transportation, again if NYS wanted to give the money they know how to do it.
Because the Constitution doesn’t allow for “lunch” money or “computers” money. And transportation is only allowed to cover the actual cost of the transportation.
4) Don’t give the schools money but give parents a break in taxes, for “private” schooling, nothing to do with religion.
That may be workable, but then you have the issue of the fact that it’ll be difficult (if not impossible) to pass through a tax break for private schoolers when the state is flat broke, not to mention the fact that it would be perceived as a “tax break for the rich” (since private education, whether correctly or not, is closely associated with the rich).
The Wolf
The reason they dont is because they are sonei yisroel. Eisva sonei lyakov — they don’t want us to learn and they do everything to try to stop us.
You seriously believe the reason that New York State doesn’t pay for yeshivos is because they hate us? And you think they should be paying us to learn?
oooooookay….
The Wolf
OK, Chesedname, let’s start again from the top.
Education is controlled at the state level. It is not controlled at the federal level.
Despite your assertion to the contrary, there IS an amendment in the New York State Constitution. You can even see it for yourself at the following site: http://www.dos.state.ny.us/info/constitution.htm The part you’re looking for is Article XI, section 3.
It says that the state cannot provide funding (except for a few specified services) for a school that teaches religion. It does NOT say that the state cannot fund religious education. What it says is that if a school teaches religion, then NO PART of the school can be funded by the state — not the religious studies, not the secular studies, not the gym, not the arts and crafts — nothing. Once the school teaches religious studies, then the state cannot fund it — period. You’re assertion that they can pay for secular studies runs directly counter to what the amendment actually says. You’re assertion that “it’s not actually against the constitution, they use that as an excuse” is patently false.
The Blaine Amendment (as it is often called) is not likely to be repealed any time soon. Any attempt to repeal it would require ratification by the voters — which likely wouldn’t happen until the next Election Day. So, even if every frum parent in New York enrolled their kids in public school on the first day of school in September (not gonna happen) and you got the Senate and the Assembly to pass the amendment in time to get on the ballot (double not gonna happen) AND all those frum people left their kids in public school until Election Day (sooooooooooo not gonna happen) AND the rest of the electorate in the state doesn’t find out that it’s all a ruse and that all those kids are going back to Yeshiva the day after the amendment passes (also not gonna happen) then you might get state funding for the yeshivos. But, as you can see, this isn’t going to happen anytime soon.
Now that we got the state issues out of the way, let’s go onto the Federal issues.
The IRS is a federal agency, not a state agency. The federal government does not directly fund education and has little say in how the states spend their education money. The IRS certainly does not fund education.
You made the assertion that, due to IRS Revenue Ruling 93-73, Scientologists don’t pay taxes on religious education for their children. You did not provide a link, but merely a few typed paragraphs.
In any event, I took the liberty of actually looking up IRS Revenue Ruling 93-73. I will quote it for you now, in full:
Revenue Ruling 78-189, 1978-1, C.B 68, is obsoleted.
That’s it.
So, I took the liberty of looking up IRS Revenue Ruling 78-189. That one is a bit longer. However, here’s the summary at the start of the ruling:
A “fixed donation” paid to the Church of Scientology for general education courses, religious education courses and “auditing” and processing courses that does not exceed the fair market value of these courses is not a charitable contribution within the meaning of section 170 of the Code.
The long and short of it is that the ruling is that the costs of auditing and training in Scientology were not considered charitable deductions under Section 170 of the IRS Code. “Auditing” is a religious service provided in Scientology. In 1978 the IRS ruled that this is not a legitimate charity and therefore the costs were not deductible. In 1993, they changed their mind. It does not, however, state that Scientologists can now deduct religious education from their federal taxes.
Now, let me provide you with some background on the IRS ruling in 1993.
The Church of Scientology was recognized as a church by the IRS when it was formed. The IRS revoked the Church’s tax-exempt status in the 1960s.
By 1993, the IRS finally agreed to recognize Scientology as a church and make them tax-exempt — just like every other church. When they finally settled the deal in 1993, the Church paid the IRS about $12 million to settle back claims. The IRS basically agreed to call off everything else if the Church dropped its remaining lawsuits against the IRS.
So, in other words, it’s not like the IRS suddenly went up to the Church and said “here, take some free tax credits.” The Church had been fighting for over 20 years to be recognized… well, as a church. The IRS eventually relented. There’s certainly nothing in IRS Revenue Ruling 93-73 (which I quoted above in it’s entirety) that states that Scientologists can deduct their tuition payments.
If you have some other info to present, please do so.
The Wolf
not true, we can easily separate the religious studies from the secular, and hence no problems and no laws being broken.
Have you actually read the paragraph I quoted?
It doesn’t say the state won’t provide funding for religious studies. It says that the state won’t provide funding (aside from a few specified services) to a school where religion is taught.
The Wolf
chesed,
Based on a WSJ report I found (http://www-2.cs.cmu.edu/~dst/Cowen/essays/wj301297.html), the case was the culmination of a long battle where the IRS refused to recognize the Church of Scientology as a real church. Eventually, the IRS relented in 1993.
Based on the report I found, there is no mention of education credits for religious schools. The only “special exemption” I see is where they can deduct costs for auditing — which, in theory, is no different than dedcuting the cost of kibbudim that a person buys in shul.
And, lastly, in any event, the IRS is a federal agency. Education, however, is a state issue. I asked you to provide a cite that Scientologists received credit on their state taxes. You have (so far) failed to do that.
The Wolf
Taxes and military service come to mind.
The Wolf
Y’know, with that attitude a lot of good laws, that were thought impossible to pass, would never have been signed into law.
Maybe, maybe not.
But as I said, if you think it’s doable, go for it. I won’t stand in your way.
The Wolf
it’s not actually against the constitution, they use that as an excuse.
It is. I even quoted the relevant portion above. Or do you think I plucked that out of thin air?
1) they can give the 4k and say it’s for the secular education.
No they can’t. Read the quote above.
2) if we would really enroll in ps, you’ll see how quickly they can change the law, especially when their cost goes sky high.
Won’t happen for several reasons.
1. You’re not going to get people to enroll their kids in public school.
2. Even if you did that, the law can’t be changed overnight. The legislature has to vote on it and then it has to go to the voters (likely on Election Day). Do you think that all those from parents are going to keep their kids in public school between September and November?
3. Even if they did do that, the voters would understand it to be the ploy that it is and would not vote to fund religious private schools.
3) scientology, parents get all tuition as tax deductible, what happened to the law? by us they say no?
No they don’t. The institutions are tax-exempt – and so are yeshivos. But that doesn’t mean that the state is paying the tuition or giving parents tax credits for the tuition.
Please provide a cite that Scientologist parents can deduct their tuition from their state taxes.
The Wolf
No accomplishment was ever generated through pessimism. 🙂
No, but part of the art of politics is the art of picking your fights carefully and not wasting political capital on fights you can’t win.
Nonetheless, I leave it to you to prove me wrong. If you can get the state constitution changed, I’ll be more than happy to state that I was wrong.
The Wolf
Let State government’s provide voucher funding for private schools (charter, etc.) and stand up to the teacher’s union thugs and gradually privatize public schools in an orderly, organized, fashion. This way all Americans, rich and poor, can have the ability to choose the best school’s appropriate for their children, rather than only the rich having access to private schooling whilst the poor are stuck with failed inner city public schools.
If you can get that to work, then all the more power to you. But I think that politically and economically, it’s a no-go even in flush times, let alone now.
The Wolf
WolfishMusings
You’re actually wrong on all 3 points
1) while technically we can go to public schools, the fact is, it cost them between 8k and 15k per student per year. if we or any other group says we would like a better school system (forget religion) and it cost us less than what you’re paying now, so help us with 4k a year, per student per year, there is no good reason they can’t or don’t do so.
Yes there is a good reason… if it’s a religious school. It’s the State Constitution.
2) of course taxes are based on usage, if a municipality estimates there are 400 police calls a year, 400 calls for ambulance, and 400 fires per year, they know how much staff they need and that’s part of the taxes.
if the call volume doubled so would the staff and that part of the tax bill.
I meant on an individual level. You pay the same amount for the fire department no matter how many times you call them. You can’t say “I’d like a credit on my taxes because I didn’t call the fire department this year.” Likewise, you can’t say “I want a credit on my taxes because my kids don’t go to public school.”
3) why not? if i feel the public school system does a lousy job, or has some tough kids running around with weapons as long as the alternative is cheaper the state should have no problem with it.
Because the state is mandated to provide you with a school. They aren’t mandated to see to it that everyone gets the school they want.
as far as hatzoloh they do get money, not as much as they need, but they do get money
Do they? If so then I stand corrected there. But then again, there’s nothing in the state Constitution prohibiting it.
The Wolf
1. Laws, including state constitutional provisions, can be changed.
Of course they are. But it’s not going to happen.
To amend the NYS Constitution, the voters must vote on it. I’d venture that getting the voters to agree to spend millions on private school education (when their own kids go to public school or when they don’t have kids of their own) is going to be a tough sell. Add in the fact that the state is broke and then you’re really in for an uphill climb.
2. Blaine is unfair and potentially (Federally) unconstitutional. It discriminates against secular studies offered by a religious organization, whereas Blaine does not prohibit the same economic educational assistance to a private, non-parochial, school.
I haven’t researched the case law, but considering the fact that it’s been on the books in New York for many years (and in other states as well), I’d guess that someone must have challenged it by now and been shot down. However, if you feel strongly enough about it, bring the case…
3. The State does not belong in the educational business anymore than it belongs in the supermarket business. America is not a socialized (at least it shouldn’t be) country. And, frankly, government is a proven failure in the educational business, especially for high school and below.
That may be true, but it doesn’t impact the argument one way or the other. <s>Nonetheless, you can’t make the case that the state shouldn’t be in education while at the same time making the case that the state should pay for yeshivos.</s>
(Didn’t see your added paragraph. Will address it afterwards, but want to get this in in the edit window.)
The Wolf
If you think you can make judgment calls from a pic, you’re setting yourself up for disappointment. A picture can easily lead to the opposite conclusion than reality.
So can a reference call.
The Wolf
It should also be pointed out that the taxes argument is a false one for three reasons:
1. The state is fulfilling it’s educational mandate to you. The mandate is to provide any child in the state with a public school education. The offer is there for you or I to avail ourselves of. The fact that we choose not to avail ourselves of it doesn’t change the fact that they are fulfilling their mandate.
2. We don’t assess taxes based on usage. You pay the same amount for the police department, fire department, EMS, sanitation, etc. regardless of whether you call them every other day or not at all over the course of the year. Likewise, everyone pays for education regardless of whether they have kids in the school, have kids who have since graduated or even never had kids at all.
3. Lastly, you aren’t entitled to your own private institutions. You don’t get to ask the city to fund Hatzoloh because you want a religious ambulance service, do you? You don’t get to ask the city to fund Shomrim because you want a religious police force, right? Likewise, you don’t get to ask the state to fund yeshivos just because you want a religious education.
The Wolf
he state can refrain from paying for the Yeshivah portion of the education. But they have every responsibility to pay for the SECULAR education, which we support through our taxes
Oomis,
I’m afraid you’re wrong. Here’s the relevant section of the state consitution:
Neither the state nor any subdivision thereof, shall use its property or credit or any public money, or authorize or permit either to be used, directly or indirectly, in aid or maintenance, other than for examination or inspection, of any school or institution of learning wholly or in part under the control or direction of any religious denomination, or in which any denominational tenet or doctrine is taught, but the legislature may provide for the transportation of children to and from any school or institution of learning.
In other words, aside from the specific services mentioned (inspection, transportation, etc.) the state is prohibited from funding the school at all if religion is taught there. Secular studies is not one of the services excepted.
The Wolf
Volvie,
Oh, I don’t doubt that they’ll make it very difficult for you to become intentionally stateless, but if push comes to shove, I believe they have to accept it.
But I’ll admit up front that I don’t know that for a fact.
The Wolf
Volvie,
Based on the link you provided above, an Israeli must present proof of alternate citizenship before renouncing Israeli citizenship. So, what you said is true WRT Israel, but not the U.S.
The Wolf
Volvie,
I don’t know about Israel, but that’s not true of the U.S. As per the Dept. of State:
Persons intending to renounce U.S. citizenship should be aware that, unless they already possess a foreign nationality, they may be rendered stateless and, thus, lack the protection of any government. They may also have difficulty traveling as they may not be entitled to a passport from any country.
http://travel.state.gov/law/citizenship/citizenship_776.html
The Wolf
Just a small piece of advice…
Before you renounce your citizenship (to any country), make sure you have citizenship in another country. You don’t want to find yourself as a stateless person.
The Wolf
I do it too. I have two finals next week and yet I spend a fair amount of time on distracting things.
The Wolf
wolfish: so if tuition is brought down by half, that’s great, and sorry i meant state not city
OK, so let’s go on to the next step.
1. Do you think that the state is going to step in and give money to private schools? Keep in mind two very important facts:
a. New York State is prohibited (via it’s constitution) from supporting religious education. Therefore, even if the state Legislature *wanted* to pay for yeshiva education, they couldn’t.
b. The state is flat broke. Getting the state to agree to pay millions of dollars for private school education would be tough even in flush years — in times like these, it’s going to be darn near impossible.
The Wolf
please explain yourself.
Sure.
Yeshiva sees parents are currently paying X for tuition per student(let’s just say $8000 to pick a number out of thin air). So, current tuition is $8K per student.
Now, let’s say the city kicks in $6K (again, just to pick a number out of thin air) per student. You are expecting yeshivos to lower tuition to $2K (to cover the difference). I contend that that will not happen. Yeshivos will see that parents are still capable of paying $8K (or close to it) for tuition and will simply raise tuition by $4-6K per student, since most parents can pay more than $2K per year per student.
And I’m still waiting for *you* to explain why you think the city should kick anything in when education is a state mandate, not a city one.
The Wolf
When the city decides to give more funding to yeshivos, the tuition will go down
Why do you think the city should give any money to Yeshivos? Education is a state issue, not a city issue.
And, assuming state funding for yeshivos becomes a reality (which it won’t — but that’s a side issue), how do you know that yeshivos won’t merely raise their tuition 80-100% of the amount that they receive?
The Wolf
I think the question HAS been answered. The answer is NO
ZachKessin has a degree in physics. I’m waiting for him to weigh in.
The Wolf
(get it? — relativity, mass dilation, weigh in…)
Health,
I think you’re a bit confused on this. A light-year is a measure of distance — nothing more. It is the amount of distance that light can travel in one year (hence the name). It is equal to 4.5 trillion miles (approximately).
Also, the mass would be infitismly small.
Actually, the opposite is true. Objects *gain* mass as they approach c. I used to joke that if I excersized (by running) I would actually gain weight (because I was a bit closer to c.*
4) A cracked whip’s tip (not the entire object, but a portion of it).
Yep — that’s the answer I was looking for.
The Wolf
* Yes, it’s a joke. Obviously I can’t run that fast for it to make a bit of difference.
ICOT,
Tachyons are, to this point, purely hypothetical. I’m not saying that they don’t exist, mind you… just that they are, to this point, purely hypothetical.
I could be wrong on this, but I’m fairly certain you need to go faster than 25K MPH to see the effects of time dilation.
Lastly, of course it’s possible that FTL travel can happen one day through technological means. However, your analogy to supersonic travel* is flawed. No one denied that an object could move faster than the speed of sound, they merely theorized that a structural object (such as an aircraft) could not withstand it. I’m sure they would have agreed that with better engineering and materials, it would be possible.
However, nothing (as we presently understand it) can go FTL. Any technological advances that will allow FTL travel will probably not involve altering this law of physics, but rather with warping space and/or time in some way.
The Wolf
* Bonus question: What was the first man-made object to move faster than the speed of sound?
1918 World War I: German fighter ace Manfred von Richthofen, known as “The Red Baron”, is shot down and killed over Vaux sur Somme in France.
And despite being dead since 1918, The Red Baron continued to plague Snoopy as he flew in his Sopwith Camel for decades to come.
He may have been a decent fielder, but he was a lousy hitter. Casey Stengel (the legendary manager) used to say of him that he could speak eight languages but he couldn’t hit in any of them. “The Catcher Was A Spy” is a pretty good biography of Berg.
1994 The first discoveries of extrasolar planets are announced by astronomer Alexander Wolszczan.
Mighty fine telescope you’ve got there, Alex.
Actually, the first exoplanets weren’t discovered through direct observation but through the effect their gravity had on their stars. That’s why the first exoplanets to be discovered were large planets (think multi-Jovian masses) orbiting very close to their stars.
The Wolf
I think he said that beyond the speed of light there is no time, but at the speed of light there is time.
Health,
I think you might be referring to the time-dilation effects of near-light-speed travel. However, there is no such thing as “beyond the speed of light.” Nothing can travel faster than the speed of light as it would acquire infinite mass and require infinite energy to get up to that speed. Unless your last name is “Kirk” or “Picard” have a warp drive, of course. 🙂
The Wolf
Phases of Venus anyone?
The Wolf
doesn’t believe in Hashem, but she’s scared of going to gehenom and being burned by the oil.
Aren’t these two statement mutually exclusive? If one posits (God forbid — pun intended) that there is no God, then why would one posit that gehenom exists to the extent that she would be afraid of it?
The Wolf
Thank you, d a!
The Wolf
This may sound like a stupid question, but here goes:
How does one apply for Youthcorp? Is there an online form? Or does one go to a government office?
Thanks,
The Wolf
The legacy of a misspent youth. 🙂
Plus the fact that I saw an article on it interviewing Bob Feller on the 70th anniversary of the no-hitter (today).
The Wolf
FWIW, Dave Ramsey recommends that you have a small emergency fund first ($1000 or so — you’ll have to translate to NIS). By having the fund, you won’t need to turn to credit for the odd emergency that crops up every now and again.
Of course, you still have to at least pay the minimum while you’re building up the small emergency fund.
The Wolf
1941 Bob Feller of the Cleveland Indians throws the only Opening Day no-hitter in the history of Major League Baseball, beating the Chicago White Sox 1-0.
Now you know the answer to a baseball trivia question: How did a team have a no-hitter thrown against them, but nobody’s batting average went down?
Two minor quibbles:
One, the year was 1940, not 1941.
Two, while it is technically true that no one average went down, that’s a bit misleading. Someone once posed a similar question to me — when did it happen that every player on a team had the same batting average after a game as they did before. The answer I was given was the White Sox on 4/16/1940, after Feller’s no hitter. Before the game, their average was .000 and so it was afterwards.
I argued with the questioner, telling him that his answer was incorrect. Before the game the White Sox batters didn’t have a .000 average — they have no average at all, having never batted yet that season.
By the same token, you can’t say that no one’s average on the White Sox went down (or up) since they didn’t have an average to begin with. You can make the same case for every batter the first time he comes to bat in the season.
The Wolf
I know I’m going to get slammed for this, but here goes…
I generally don’t double park either. I agree that (legalities aside) it is rude, inconsiderate and thoughtless regarding the well-being of your fellow man (or woman).
That being said, there is one occasion where I regularly double-park.
My mother is disabled. For her, walking more than a few steps comes at a fairly high price (pain-wise). So, when I take her home from my house (she comes to visit fairly often), I will double park in front of her building (and help her into the building) if I can’t find a close spot.
Fortunately, she lives on a very wide one-way street. Even with my minivan double parked, there is more than enough room for a garbage truck, school bus or other similarly large vehicle to pass. About the only things that might have trouble are tractor trailers or tanks — both of which are seen very rarely (if at all) on that street.
(And yes, when I do double park, I try to do it in a way that no one is blocked in. And, if it must be that way, then I’m always checking to make sure that the blocked-in people aren’t there and need me to move.)
The Wolf
One additional point is that old census records can be invaluable in tracing family ancestry. Many old census records are now available online through for-profit internet services who took the time to scan them in and index them.
Indeed. I’ve found quite a few ancestor records in the 1900, 1910, 1920 and 1930 censuses. And I’ll be ready to comb though the 1940 census when it becomes public in 2012.
The Wolf
it is halachically questionable to count people
Please quote the source where there is any halachic issue with non-Jews performing a census.
The Wolf
Assuming you’re in New York City, call any hospital in a Jewish neighborhood and ask for the Bikur Cholim office. I know that Kings Highway hospital has one in the building.
They will be able to give you information regarding minimum age, duties, etc.
Hatzlacha and good job for being willing to volunteer.
The Wolf
just because a drug was once used for medical purposes that doesnt mean it should be legalized.
Agreed.
And, it should be pointed out, that legalizing drugs does not have to be an “all or nothing” proposition. Certain drugs could be legalized while others remain illegal.
The Wolf
but i’m still gonna give Bli neder when i turn sixteen!!!!!
Good for you. My sixteen year old has already given twice.
Just remember that in New York, you need parental permission to donate at sixteen. (You can donate without parental permission at seventeen.)
The Wolf
n addition, there are times (especially WRT emergencies) when the doctors won’t have time to wait for donors — they need to have the blood on hand right away.
When would warts be an emergency?
Sorry… I wasn’t clear. WRT is an acronym. It stands for “with regard to.”
The Wolf
Shmuel Hanavi who killed Og Melech Habashan (do I have that right?) when Shaul Hamelech failed to do what he was commanded, to execute him.
wasn’t that dovid hamelech?
For the record, it was Shmuel. The king, however, was Agag of Amalek.
The Wolf
Mayan,
I didn’t have a problem with the first part (that Congress should be subject to the laws of the people). I had a problem with the second part (that the laws of Congress should apply to the people).
And, as established, with regard to HCR, Congress does have to participate in the plan.
The Wolf