Vayetze: economics

Vayetze: economics

The etymologic dictionaries on the web say that economics comes from the Greek words for house (ecos) and laws( nomos).  My false etymology has the word coming form e ( exit, leaving, vayetze)  and co ( together) , leaving the area of support and cooperation. Economics deals with situations of competition and the struggle for gain, leaving the comfort zone. 

Yaakov leaves his home.  Home has become uncomfortable after the murderous declartion of Esau, reacting to Yaakov's seizing the blessing of the first born.  Yaakov launches, he goes out on his  own.  He is going back to Haran, the place  that Abraham left. 

On the way he has a dream that tells  him he will inherit  the sacred  land that  he is leaving.  He immediately makes a deal: 10% for the Provider of all   Even with Gd, business is business,  No free lunch.

Jacob comes to the watering hole.  Jacob remarks on the way the shepherds are doing their jobs, implying that they are featherbedding.   The locals  counter that they are a collective,  they have a system for using  the well,  perhaps an assurance of fairness. But when Jacob sees Rachel, he ignores that tradition and  uncovers the well.  Is this anti communist Objectivism?

Jacob has nothing to offer Lavan  but his labor, and with that he buys his bride. The replacement of Rachel with Leah echos  Jacob's deception of  Isaac.  The point is brought home when   Laban said: 'It is not so done in our place, to give the younger before the first-born.

What do you do when you are cheated? Make the best of it.  

After his 14  year internship, Laban wants to  contract his animal husbandry business to Jacob Lavan provides the capital, Jacob invests it. Through some strange biology, Jacob is enriched by the deal.

Jacob skips the exit interview and leaves for his Promised Land. Lavan gives chase.  Then there is the argument between labor and capital.  Jacob describes his sacrifice,  the ever changing interpretations of his contract and claims possession of the goods.  Lavan argues that  it is all his because he supplied the capital. In Lavan's view, Jacob remained a sharecropper.  Through the intervention of a dream, Jacob wins

Is this the origin of the economic Jew: Communist, banker, entrepreneur.Building fortunes from nothing and then losing everything when they are forced out of the country?

You can't take it with you. But that only applies to the money.

Toldoth: contracts

Toldoth: contracts

The climax of the parsha is when Esau realizes that the blessing had been given to Jacob, He pleads, he curses, he plans murder.  Esau feels that he has been duped. But early in the parsha we hear about  the crucial moment: Esau  sells his primogeniture to Jacob.  Did that sale give Jacob  the right to claim the blessing ...by any means? What had been sold? Should Esau have told Isaac that he had sold his status to his brother?  Did Isaac already know that? 

Esau sold a concept for immediate gratification. Ironically, he was returning from doing what his father loved, hunting.  He was returning from killing animals, recognizing the transient nature of life. Recognizing his mortality. Esau sells something he may never use or need.  When he senses what he has lost, he is demonstrating the Prospect Theory of Kahneman and Tversky, loss is valued far more than gain.

The youth does not recognize the value of his birthright.

Today is the Yahrzeit for my mother (A"H).  When  I had an aliya and  gave her name: Esther Breindel bath Shlomo Zalman,  the gabai gave me a look.  Was I mistakenly giving my name instead of my grandfather's?  Then he realized that  I am named after that grandfather, who was murdered in the Holocaust ( by the descendants of angry,[ cheated?] Esau). Then,  I could feel my birthright, my birth-obligation, and I shed a tear.  I can never honor that name enough.

And I could imagine myriads of Germans and Poles who all had signed contracts with Jews
 ( or people they imagined to be Jews),
 and did not realize what those contracts meant
 until they had to struggle to pay the stipulation,
until they felt the crushing loss.
 And they were angry,
a justified anger,
 at the people of the contract,
the Jews.
 Angry enough to ...

The blessing that Isaac finally gives Esau in consolation goads him to throw off the yoke of his brother, to break the contract. What's that?

Chaye Sarah: the deal

Swirling through the parsha are ideas of continuity, marriage, purchase, inclusion and exclusion.  It begins with the death of Sarah, an event that necessitates a purchase of land in perpetuity, and ends with the death of Avraham, buried by both of his sons, Isaac and Ishamel. 

There are several deals made in Chaye Sarah.  They are very telling

 First there is the  purchase of the burial ground for Sarah, the Meorath Hmachpelah. This is used as a paradigm in the talmud, Kicha Kicha misdei Efron.  The people of Heth offer a burial plot free of charge, but  Avraham has identified a location that he wants

Avraham  approaches Efron,  the owner of the land that he wants. Efron offers the desired plot as a gift to Avraham.  Avraham refuses to take the plot as a gift. [ Note: the Jew will take the free gift.]  Rather, Avraham elicits from Efron  a valuation of 400 zuz ( an enormous sum [a man, in his prime, is valued at 50 zuz]) and pays it in currency. 

Is this a purchase or an exchange of gifts? The Talmud associates the laws of monetary exchange for marriage with this story.  I like the idea of exchange of gifts better in that context.  I also like the fact that  the story models a monetary transfer for something that can be obtained free of charge.

The money that Avraham gives Efron is described as over lisocher: current money with the merchant. Avraham exchanged something of transient value for something permanant. 

Another time, I would like to explore the other deals made in this parsha:

• The agreement between Eliezer and Avraham (contingencies in the contract)
• Eliezer's deal with Gd ( the improbable and insurance)
• Rivka's deal with watering the camels ( delayed payment for services, working for tips)
• Avraham and the children of Keturah (payoffs)

Beware of the bargain:

You have $530,000 in Nigeria!

Vayerah: pleadings

Vayerah: pleadings

When  I read about Avraham pleading  for Sodom and environs, I become very upset.  Where was father Avraham's plea  for Warsaw?  Maybe the dead cannot plead.  Where was the Avraham of that generation?

Ultimately, Sodom does not meet even the minimal criterion of 10 righteous people.  Was Lodz that bad?  Had the rules changed? What kind of righteousness is required?

When Avraham and Lot separated, Lot chose the rich valley.  Lot chose wealth - even though it was mixed with evil. Are we oncologists doing the same thing? 

At a recent leukemia conference, a patient with chronic myelogenous leukemia was discussed. About 20 years ago, a medicine that almost always stops the disease, imatinib, was discovered.  Subsequently, 4 more medicines that  may work even  in more  resistant cases, were discovered  

The case under discussion had a 1,000 to 10,000   fold reduction in the cancerous cells.  But the cells were still detectable.  In chronic myelogenous leukemia, this is a sustainable state,  The patient feels fine and the risk of a life threatening crisis is below 1%.  We discusses what to do about the incompleteness of the response. 

I suggested increasing the dose of imatinib.  The presenting doctor was concerned about the patient needing to swallow two large pills daily. He thought switching to one of the alternative medicines would be better.  

I pointed out that imatinib can be bought ( in Canada)   for $5.00 per pill.. Its patent has expired.  The alternative costs $12,000,00 for a month's supply, $300.00 per pill.  The represenatives of the drug companies were sitting, like an audience, in the back of the room.  They were silent when I asked for comment.  They pay for the coffee and fruit at the meeting. 

The doctors laughed.

  Like the sons-in-law of Lot.