Spending money when others are in need

Log in / Sign Up

List of Forums + New Post Recipe Box Usergroups Following My Posts Bookmarks

Private Messages Advanced Search Rules New User Guide FAQ Advertise Contact Us

Forum -> Interesting Discussions

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 Next

View latest: 24h 48h 72h

Maya

Tue, May 13 2008, 7:43 pm

I recently had this discussion with a friend, and I'm curious about what you ladies all think.

Suppose I can afford to buy something, and let's say it's a handbag that costs $150. I have given my maaser and more to tzedakka already. Is it fine for me to spend that money on something so trivial when there are people out there that can helped so much with that amount? In other words, is it fair of me to splurge on things I want every so often when there are so many families in need?

Besides for the "I would never buy a handbag for that amount" comments, what do you think?

chocolate moose

Tue, May 13 2008, 7:44 pm

We have discussed this repeatedly. We don't live in communistic Russia. You are allowed to live your life your way.

Maya

Tue, May 13 2008, 7:46 pm

Note that I didn't use the words 'allowed' or 'have to'. I used 'fine' and 'fair'.

freidasima

Tue, May 13 2008, 8:16 pm

Yes if you have given zedaka it is fine and fair that you do it.
I posted this one one of the previous threads already but I learned it from my father z'l and I am saying it in his zechus. A wealthy person is mechuyav to eat on fancy plates and have good food and a nice home, why? Because if he eats on wooden planks and eats very simple food he will think that the poor, to whom he donates, need even less...they can live on bread served on a paper napkin or something like that. Thus a rich person has to be on an incredibly high madrega in order to live "poor", otherwise he is mechuyav to live on the standard to which he belongs financially.

Another thing, if you buy yourself nice things (kelim naim, etc. are one of the things that Chazal say are mind enlarging and inspiring "marchivim es daaso she odom") then you can look at it and have yet another reason to praise the Ribono Shel Olam...you are permitted and even chayav to have pleasure in this world, all the time remembering that it is fleeting, that we have it for a reason and that is to give us yet another reason to be happy, content and eager to praise the Almighty (or so I tell dh every time I go and buy material to make myself a skirt or shabbos robe! and he never says "no"...zaddik that he is...)

chaylizi

Tue, May 13 2008, 8:20 pm

wow! I didn't know that.

pinkbubbles

Wed, May 14 2008, 3:49 am

freidasima wrote:

wow thanks for posting that, haven't seen that posted before.

I totally have issues with spending money while there are people that need it, even I gave tzedaka, so this totally helps me out.

Tamiri

Wed, May 14 2008, 4:08 am

There will always be people with less than you. After you take care of your social obligations (tzedaka etc.) you need to enjoy what you have. You will never be able to fix the world so that everyone has the same.

grin

Wed, May 14 2008, 4:31 am

I agree. If you want to give more than ma'aser, so give chomesh (1/5 instead of 1/10) But if Hashem is allowing you to live beharchava, maybe it's the standard you need to be able to serve Hashem with simcha?
(it's the poor person's avoda to try to understand that your needs may be different than his.)

zigi

Wed, May 14 2008, 9:25 am

by spending money in the local economy you are spreading money around, you are keeping the store that sells expensive things in business. they can pay their bills and they can pay for more things....

mimivan

Wed, May 14 2008, 9:31 am

Also, I don't think most people believe what they are spending money on is useless...no matter if it may seem trivial to others. Most people can justify, to some extent, their every purchase...why it is needed.

I think those who self-consciously "blow money" are in the tiny minority...

Atali

Wed, May 14 2008, 11:21 am

zigi wrote:

by spending money in the local economy you are spreading money around, you are keeping the store that sells expensive things in business. they can pay their bills and they can pay for more things....

I think that this is a very good point. You can spend money and help others. If you have a choice of two stores, go to the smaller store where the owner really depends on the parnassa, instead of the larger chain store which is owned by a corperation.

Fox

Wed, May 14 2008, 3:37 pm

I have mixed feelings about this. While it's definitely permitted to make such a purchase, I wouldn't feel comfortable doing it -- at least not on a regular basis.

The problem is that I don't want to "raise the bar" for everyone in my community. If my friends and I begin wearing $150 purses, $30 purses gradually become unacceptable. Pretty soon, anyone with a $30 purse is a "nebach case", and for what? Not because $150 purses are intrinsically better than $30 purses! Rather, peer pressure has slowly and gradually mounted until someone who resists -- out of economic necessity or principle -- is viewed as a bit of an oddball.

While I support the idea of moving the money around and providing parnosseh, I'm not sure that promoting luxury goods is the best way to do that. It's a vicious cycle: the more that formerly luxury goods become the norm, the more parnosseh is needed by everyone, and the more stress is placed on breadwinners at all levels.

There's no clear-cut, universal answer except that we have to be ruthlessly honest with ourselves. If I spend $3000 on a shaitel, does it really look 5 times as good as a $500 shaitel? Or does it only look somewhat better? Is the custom-made Italian furniture really 6 times as sturdy as the mass-produced option or am I being charged a premium for the name?

It's true that many people have a certain area in which they spend freely, even while they economize in other areas. Likewise, a person might choose to purchase one expensive purse rather than several cheaper ones. However, I often see people who take pride in trying to purchase the "best" of everything. While I try to judge them favorably, they often seem as if they've swallowed every advertisement in the Jewish media hook, line, and sinker. I'm more impressed with people who are able to discern value rather than cost.

cassandra

Wed, May 14 2008, 3:50 pm

Fox, can you be my life coach? Or at least my financial advisor?

chaylizi

Wed, May 14 2008, 3:52 pm

I think she should be the resident imamother psychiatrist. she can set us all on the straight and narrow.

greenfire

Wed, May 14 2008, 3:57 pm

it is unfortunate if people buy things cause others have them ... why can't we just look at what we need ... and yes sometimes a "want" is a "need" as well cause it helps us to function better ...

a person always can give more if they choose ... even after the standard levels of tzedaka are given ...

also one is happier giving if they themselves have - so I don't see why you cannot treat yourself good as well ...

Maya

Wed, May 14 2008, 4:26 pm

Fox, while that post was wonderful, I'm not sure it applies to my question. I'm not raising any bars by buying something that is slightly more expensive every few months. And I don't buy things because other people have them. I was just wondering if I should not allow myself to splurge on something because others can't afford it.
But thank you for your insight.

Clarissa

Wed, May 14 2008, 4:37 pm

Fox, I liked your post, but I don't know if I agree. I don't think buying something beautiful, that you love, raises the bar. Nor do I think we're responsible for every purchase inspiring, or not inspiring, competitive shopping in others. I don't have an engagement ring from this husband. We just couldn't afford it, I don't care about it and I worked in a culture where it wasn't the thing to do, wearing diamond jewelry. Does anybody owe it to me to be careful about their rings, beyond the boundaries of good taste and what they can afford? If somebody's style is a big, clunky diamond, that's their style. I may consider it ostentatious, but it's none of my business, right?

I don't consider $150 all that expensive for a purse, although I've rarely spent that much. In the world of bags, it seems like a decent price. If someone sees one they adore, why can't they? Maybe someone carrying a $30 purse owns ten of them, and the person being discussed will only own one or two bags that she loves. Maybe it's a style and a quality that she loves. My grandparents weren't wealthy and didn't own much, but my grandfather believed in very good quality. I used to be with this man who loved Chinese takeout. He'd get it all the time. I'd tell him that we could go out for a fabulous meal for the cost of twenty mediocre Chinese meals. To each, his or her own.

If you love something, can afford it, aren't stingy with others and really appreciate what you buy, what's the problem? I have friends who spend $750 on bags that they don't even care about all that much.* If the person being discussed wants to spend a decent amount of money on something she'll love and it won't put her into debt, who cares?

*one of the friends gives me her hand-me-down bags when she's cleaning her closet. One was a nearly-new Coach bag. So I support her over-spending whole-heartedly.

cassandra

Wed, May 14 2008, 4:53 pm

Clarissa wrote:

If you love something, can afford it, aren't stingy with others and really appreciate what you buy, what's the problem? I have friends who spend $750 on bags that they don't even care about all that much.* If the person being discussed wants to spend a decent amount of money on something she'll love and it won't put her into debt, who cares?

There is something wrong with it. I think that pursuit of materialism is a negative value and one that I have to fight within myself all the time, usually unsuccessfully. Owning possessions doesn't get you anything. I cannot find anything redeeming in owning an expensive bag, even if I do own one.* I am very conscious of the little details in design and construction that make the difference between the expensive bag and the Target knock-off. Yet is that difference worth the tremendous difference in price? Isn't it something that I should work on correcting in myself rather than allowing myself to be consumed by it?

*Maya, this isn't directed at you at all. I think a once in a while purchase is ok and I do not think $150 is extravagant for a bag. Peter Singer is a moral extremist who I respect as a philosopher and who practices what he preaches, and he would say that you should not purchase the bag. The rest of the world would be okay with it. You worked for your money and have no obligation to give it away to others, though it does require a little bit of turning a blind eye. It would be a highly moral thing to give it away, but not immoral to buy the bag.

Clarissa

Wed, May 14 2008, 5:17 pm

cassandra wrote:

Clarissa wrote:

No matter how much money I had, I personally wouldn't spend a lot on a bag. On the other hand, if we examined everyone's life, wouldn't we find something that we feel stretches the bounds of necessity? If my friend Sally goes on a nice vacation, she'll say that the family needed the rest, travel broadens her children's horizons, they'd earned the break from routine. Beth spends a few hundred on a bag. A waste of a few hundred, in my opinion, but she loves this bag and it's really good quality.

Most of my close friends aren't into material possessions. I always said that if you put all of my closest friends in one room, you'd have no idea who had money and who didn't. They have similar styles, and nobody is into clothing or jewelry. One spends money on her film projects, another spent what money he had on a really pretty house in a peaceful neighborhood. Another spends her money on Jewish school tuition. But nobody does the purse/jewely/clothing thing, although some of them do buy good quality. I do have one friend who loves to shop and spends a lot of money. She's a fairly new friend, and one of a group of friends I have who tend to shop a lot. One does extensive charity work (I wrote about her last week, she and her husband underwrite a benefit to fund a grant for cancer research) and gives a lot, although she certainly isn't stingy with herself. I can see the negative side of material possessions, but a lot of time I'm not even aware of what people spend, or why. I don't buy a lot of stuff but I have lots and lots of kitchen gadgets and books. My friend isn't wealthy but does sometimes collect folk art. Am I okay, is my friend the art collector okay, or are we grouped with the jewelry people? Where is the line drawn? I don't own a home, but I'm not stingy with myself at the bookstore. Would you say that the money I spend on books isn't right, considering that some people go without?

Does buying something expensive mean we've been taken in by consumerism? Does it mean we care about names more values? Which things are okay to spend on and which things denote shallowness or materialism?

I'm not giving back that Coach bag, you know.

gonewiththewind

Wed, May 14 2008, 5:22 pm

I don't really want to disagree with freidasima's father, as I am sure I am not even in his league, but I suppose if people here disagree with Rabbanim and gedolim all the time it is not considered too disrespectful here to disagree, and I am not completely disagreeing. If Maya has that sensitivity, why discourage it? I think it's special. I know a number of people who don't live anywhere near the standard of living of their economic group. freidsima's father is right that not everyone can do this, but there really are those who do, a number of whom I know personally.

A well-known example of someone who was wealthy and gave away almost all his wealth is Elimelech Tress. When Jewish lives could be saved with money, he couldn't hold on to his savings and sold his stock holdings that would have made him rich, and instead he ended up with very little money. At the end of his life his daughter commented "if only you had kept those stocks," and he replied, "boruch hashem that I sold them." There are many other such examples.

Raising the bar for others is only one of the reasons not to spend lavishly. The other, and main one, is for yourself. Materialism and spirituality for the most part don't mix well. As the chofetz chaim famously said, I am also a traveler just passing through, why do I need more than this? The less involved we are with purchases beyond the necessities, the more we are drawn away from what is important. And the danger of transmitting the wrong priorites to our children and raising kids with a lot of needs is great. Many people with kids nowadays have had the experience of needing to get kids expensive clothing or schoolbags etc because otherwise their classmates will look down on them. Where are their classmates getting the idea the these things are important if not from their parents who seem to find having certain styles and brands important...even if they can afford it. That is why some who can afford luxury items won't buy them. Not because they are sacrificing, but because they are of of no importance to them, or even bad for their family.

Of course you need balance, and you need to feel good about how you live. But Maya is saying that she is ambivalent, that she can possibly see herself as happy without certain extras. And really, if the money can be spent on something that brings eternal reward or for you and is practically lifesaving or healthsaving for another in this world, or something that brings you some fleeting pleasure, one can see where this ambivalence comes in.

Page 1 of 9

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 Next