tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8565163061165974643.post1423262136915428645..comments2023-07-27T04:33:11.719-05:00Comments on UJ Thee and Me: AND, NOW, UJC'S CHAIR ON THE FINANCIAL CRISIS -- NO BIG DEALGracklehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/14315763008609379449noreply@blogger.comBlogger4125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8565163061165974643.post-50731069880293230012009-04-14T15:13:00.000-05:002009-04-14T15:13:00.000-05:00Dear Anonymous,
Your agency is fortunate to have ...Dear Anonymous,<br /><br />Your agency is fortunate to have had adequate resources. Yet, unfortunately, so many national agencies' have experienced the impacts not only of underfunding but of UJC's own neglect, not benign, just constant. National agencies' experiences in many ways parallel those of JAFI and JDC. <br /><br />The Post editorial today was about the need for priority setting and focus neither of which UJC has. UJC has failed to "make tough choices about what is really vital" to the federations...and these leaders don't want to do so.RWEXhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01583858140298821830noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8565163061165974643.post-38804502008029335832009-04-14T14:34:00.000-05:002009-04-14T14:34:00.000-05:00In some instances, yes. We did not move as quickl...In some instances, yes. We did not move as quickly as we might have to make changes that turned out to be good ones because the pressure was not there. Don't get me wrong - more resources are better than less, and there is a real loss in many of these "tough choices." But, as they say, when you have lemons, at least try to make lemonade. I think that is also the thrust of today's Jerusalem Post editorial.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8565163061165974643.post-23788585702995583452009-04-14T13:30:00.000-05:002009-04-14T13:30:00.000-05:00To this "Anonymous" --
I wish you would read this...To this "Anonymous" --<br /><br />I wish you would read this Blog more often as I find your Comments always thoughtful and always supportive of the Board Chair. Did your organization "tend to avoid (tough choices) when times are(were)good?"RWEXhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01583858140298821830noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8565163061165974643.post-53672865244833383702009-04-14T12:59:00.000-05:002009-04-14T12:59:00.000-05:00I don't get to read your blog as often as you writ...I don't get to read your blog as often as you write, so I'm catching up with this post, and I'll confess to being somewhat mystified.<br /><br />What exactly is the problem with the substance of what Joe Kanfer is quoted as saying? Every point he makes is accurate: Individuals are being hurt, in some cases deeply, but the system is not collapsing (thankfully). This is a time for organizations to look hard at what they are doing and make tough choices about what is really vital, and what is perhaps less relevant and central than it once was. Organizations do tend to avoid this when times are good. The current situation does have a strong psychological component (which is why the President is trying to encourage us to look beyond the immediate situation). Almost everyone has less than we did, but many still have much and are in a position to give generously (and few do give up to the traditional Jewish norm).<br /><br />I found nothing in Kanfer's comments that reflected your "headline," but rather a sober and thoughtful assessment of just where we are and how we should be responding - by trying to do as much as we can with diminished resources, and by encouraging donors to do as much as they can to mitigate the hurt.<br /><br />I'd much prefer that from a leader than hysterics.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.com