Areivim USA - Coronavirus

[YitzyS]

or rather have a checkbox "By signing I understand that this is not a life insurance replacement of any kind"

I like that idea a lot. Too much for just hitting the like button.

[JACKBLUE]

I like that idea a lot. Too much for just hitting the like button.

+1

[aygart]

or rather have a checkbox "By signing I understand that this is not a life insurance replacement of any kind"

I have read and agree to the terms and conditions...........

[yesitsme]

I have read and agree to the terms and conditions...........

Correct you shouldn't force your agenda on others, we are not in Russia

[aygart]

Correct you shouldn't force your agenda on others, we are not in Russia

I have no agenda here and I am not forcing anything on anyone. I do have an opinion though. My opinion is that this checkbox is absolutely pointless.

[ExGingi]

Correct you shouldn't force your agenda on others, we are not in Russia

Right, and since we are not in Russia, people have the choice of either joining Areivim or not. In order to keep their costs down, Areivim should offload underwriting to proper insurance companies (and BTW, there's a reason why certain risks that seem to be unrelated to mortality are factored in - those are moral risks which actually do tie into certain mortality risks). The only underwriting that Areivim should require is the proof of in-force life insurance or a contribution to a separate fund as described above for those that qualify for the exception.

[ExGingi]

or rather have a checkbox "By signing I understand that this is not a life insurance replacement of any kind"

I understand your concern, and have addressed it with my "religious exemption" requirement suggestion.

Let me share with you a story (and my explanation) as to the major difference, and why I think people that don't have life insurance and wish to join Areivim should be contributing (additionally) to a separate fund (that they should be able to withdraw, after deducting a small fee, when they reach a certain point such as age, or marrying off all but the last child).

R' Chaim Sholom Deitsch from Yerushalaim didn't "believe" in being a member of "kupat cholim" (Israeli version of health insurance). He preferred to pay whenever services are needed. One time when he came to the Rebbe, his wife urged him to ask the Rebbe about this. At the yechidus before he left to go back to Eretz Yisroel, that question was one of the topics he wrote about, and he was told by the Rebbe that he should join "kupat cholim" משום אל תפרוש מן הצבור. (I heard this story from his son, and I seem to have a recollection of it being verified with him too).

I would like to offer my (additional) interpretation to the אל תפרוש מן הצבור part. When a person participates regularly in such a "fund" then in his own time of need it is not only other people's money supporting his family, but his own funds too. Rather than saying I will participate in charitable fundraisers for others, and when my family needs charity other will contribute to them, a person should be saying I will join with the breadwinner in providing for his family as צדקה, and if G-d forbid my family needs it, others will join with me (rather than just others taking care of it).

[avromie7]

Or the risk profile has evolved adversely. Which one is it? It is not currently unworkable but is showing signs of heading in that direction.

If the risk profile evolved adversely why would 2017 have almost no collections? (My point is don't jump to conclusions due to 1 outlier - 2019)

[aygart]

If the risk profile evolved adversely why would 2017 have almost no collections? (My point is don't jump to conclusions due to 1 outlier - 2019)

If other than 2019 and 2017 they have been two families away from being overloaded that is a problem.

[avromie7]

If other than 2019 and 2017 they have been two families away from being overloaded that is a problem.

It's more than 2, based on what was posted above that they currently only give $5 from each member due to the increased pool size, there is enough room for another 28 funds per year. It would take a sustained 70% increase to max out.

[aygart]

It's more than 2, based on what was posted above that they currently only give $5 from each member due to the increased pool size, there is enough room for another 28 funds per year. It would take a sustained 70% increase to max out.

They have still been collecting the same amount total even with the larger group.

[David61]

There is a level of transparency. Recently, every collection had the name of a rav who is overseeing it. If a DDFer has a few minutes and wants to do a good deed, please call one of these rabbanim and hear firsthand about the collection, than report back here. I'll post the names of the last few collections.

April 28, 2020: We are hereby notifying you that due to the tragic passing of an Areivim Member from Lakewood, NJ who left behind a widow and 10 orphans we will be initaiting a collection on behalf of the family in the months of May and June.  This collection will be under the auspices of Rabbi Yechiel Rabinowitz, Rav D'Khal Tiferes Shimon.

Feb. 26, 2020: It is with great pain that we notify you of the recent untimely Petirah of two Areivim USA members, one from the Tosher Kehilla leaving behind 2 orphans R''l, and one from the Satmar Kehilla leaving behind a Widower and 7 orphans R''l.Therefore Areivim USA members are requested to donate in the months of March and April. Harav Yoel Hersh Moskowitz Shlita, Dayan  from Kiryas Tosh will be overseeing the collection on behalf of the Tosher family. Harav Yoel Teitelbaum Shlita Rav D'Bais Medrash Bais Boruch will be overseeing the collection on behalf of the Satmar family.

Nov. 28, 2019: It is with great pain that we notify you of the recent untimely Petirah of two Areivim USA members, one from Manchester leaving behind 7 orphans R''l, and one from the Lubavitcher Kehilla leaving behind 7 orphans R''l.Therefore Areivim USA members are requested to donate in the months of December, January and February. Harav Avrohom Yosef Halevi Heller Shlita, Rosh Kollel Avreichim and Moreh Tzedek in Crown Heights will be overseeing the collection on behalf of the Lubavitcher family. Harav Berel Cohen Shlita Rav D’Khal Ohr Yerushalayim of Manchester will be overseeing the collection on behalf of the Manchester family.

Nov 2019 collection = 16 x 100,000 = $80/member. They collected 3 months (x$28) = $84 ($4 more than needed per member )

Feb 2020 collection 10x 100,000 = $50/member. The collected 2 months ($6 extra per member)

April 2020 collection =11 x 100,000 = $55/member. They plan to collect 2months ($1 extra per member)

More transparency would be good.

[avromie7]

They have still been collecting the same amount total even with the larger group.

Because the pool is bigger. If you have a group of 101 people who agree to pay a total $100,000, if 1% die everyone pays $1,000 for a total of $100,000. If you increase the pool to 202, and 1% die everyone pays $500 for each person who died for a total payment of $1,000 per member.

[aygart]

Because the pool is bigger. If you have a group of 101 people who agree to pay a total $100,000, if 1% die everyone pays $1,000 for a total of $100,000. If you increase the pool to 202, and 1% die everyone pays $500 for each person who died for a total payment of $1,000 per member.

So then we are back to the same small amount of leeway.

[avromie7]

So then we are back to the same small amount of leeway.

Why's it a small leeway? It can handle up to 70% sustained increase.

[mgarfin]

.

[ExGingi]

.

Why is the sum 22,500,000 and not 28,800,000 for 288 orphans?

[mgarfin]

Why is the sum 22,500,000 and not 28,800,000 for 288 orphans?

I think when they started and did not have a full pool that only gave $7 x members until they reached 14k members

[David61]

Why is the sum 22,500,000 and not 28,800,000 for 288 orphans?

Plus $100,000 more for each almon/almanah with 3 or more children.

P.s. The correct spelling is orphans not “orphanes”. (In red in the poster). That’s an important word for an organization like this to spell correctly. (Unless they are intentionally trying to discourage the college educated from participating)

And Sept 2020 is “not past collections” (in poster)

[ExGingi]

Plus $100,000 more for each almon/almanah with 3 or more children.

P.s. The correct spelling is orphans not “orphanes”. (In red in the poster). That’s an important word for an organization like this to spell correctly. (Unless they are intentionally trying to discourage the college educated from participating)

And Sept 2020 is “not past collections” (in poster)

I noticed those. Maybe the misspelling of orphans can be attributed to the need for speed (so much so that they managed to already count Sept 2020 collection, trumping the need to proofread).

As for the 2020 collections, maybe they're referring to previously scheduled.