text:
"""Utility methods for transforming matrices or vectors."""

from typing import Tuple, Optional, Sequence, List, Union

import numpy as np

from cirq import protocols
from cirq.linalg import predicates

# This is a special indicator value used by the `sub_state_vector` method to
# determine whether or not the caller provided a 'default' argument. It must be
# of type np.ndarray to ensure the method has the correct type signature in that
# case. It is checked for using `is`, so it won't have a false positive if the
# user provides a different np.array([]) value.
RaiseValueErrorIfNotProvided: np.ndarray = np.array([])

def reflection_matrix_pow(reflection_matrix: np.ndarray, exponent: float):
    """Raises a matrix with two opposing eigenvalues to a power.

    Args:
        reflection_matrix: The matrix to raise to a power.
        exponent: The power to raise the matrix to.

    Returns:
        The given matrix raised to the given power.
    """

    # The eigenvalues are x and -x for some complex unit x. Determine x.
    squared_phase = np.dot(reflection_matrix[:, 0], reflection_matrix[0, :])
    phase = complex(np.sqrt(squared_phase))

    # Extract +x and -x eigencomponents of the matrix.
    i = np.eye(reflection_matrix.shape[0]) * phase
    pos_part = (i + reflection_matrix) * 0.5
    neg_part = (i - reflection_matrix) * 0.5

    # Raise the matrix to a power by raising its eigencomponents to that power.
    pos_factor = phase ** (exponent - 1)
    neg_factor = pos_factor * complex(-1) ** exponent
    pos_part_raised = pos_factor * pos_part
    neg_part_raised = neg_part * neg_factor
    return pos_part_raised + neg_part_raised

def match_global_phase(a: np.ndarray, b: np.ndarray) -> Tuple[np.ndarray, np.ndarray]:
    """Phases the given matrices so that they agree on the phase of one entry.

    To maximize precision, the position with the largest entry from one of the
    matrices is used when attempting to compute the phase difference between
    the two matrices.

    Args:
        a: A numpy array.
        b: Another numpy array.

    Returns:
        A tuple (a', b') where a' == b' implies a == b*exp(i t) for some t.
    """

    # Not much point when they have different shapes.
    if a.shape != b.shape or a.size == 0:
        return np.copy(a), np.copy(b)

    # Find the entry with the largest magnitude in one of the matrices.
    k = max(np.ndindex(*a.shape), key=lambda t: abs(b[t]))

    def dephase(v):
        r = np.real(v)
        i = np.imag(v)

        # Avoid introducing floating point error when axis-aligned.
        if i == 0:
            return -1 if r < 0 else 1
        if r == 0:
            return 1j if i < 0 else -1j

        return np.exp(-1j * np.arctan2(i, r))

    # Zero the phase at this entry in both matrices.
    return a * dephase(a[k]), b * dephase(b[k])

def targeted_left_multiply(
    left_matrix: np.ndarray,
    right_target: np.ndarray,
    target_axes: Sequence[int],
    out: Optional[np.ndarray] = None,
) -> np.ndarray:
    """Left-multiplies the given axes of the target tensor by the given matrix.

    Note that the matrix must have a compatible tensor structure.

    For example, if you have an 6-qubit state vector `input_state` with shape
    (2, 2, 2, 2, 2, 2), and a 2-qubit unitary operation `op` with shape
    (2, 2, 2, 2), and you want to apply `op` to the 5'th and 3'rd qubits
    within `input_state`, then the output state vector is computed as follows:

        output_state = cirq.targeted_left_multiply(op, input_state, [5, 3])

    This method also works when the right hand side is a matrix instead of a
    vector. If a unitary circuit's matrix is `old_effect`, and you append
    a CNOT(q1, q4) operation onto the circuit, where the control q1 is the qubit
    at offset 1 and the target q4 is the qubit at offset 4, then the appended
    circuit's unitary matrix is computed as follows:

        new_effect = cirq.targeted_left_multiply(
            left_matrix=cirq.unitary(cirq.CNOT).reshape((2, 2, 2, 2)),
            right_target=old_effect,
            target_axes=[1, 4])

    Args:
        left_matrix: What to left-multiply the target tensor by.
        right_target: A tensor to carefully broadcast a left-multiply over.
        target_axes: Which axes of the target are being operated on.
        out: The buffer to store the results in. If not specified or None, a new
            buffer is used. Must have the same shape as right_target.

    Returns:
        The output tensor.
    """
    if out is right_target or out is left_matrix:
        raise ValueError('out is right_target or out is left_matrix')

    k = len(target_axes)
    d = len(right_target.shape)
    work_indices = tuple(range(k))
    data_indices = tuple(range(k, k + d))
    used_data_indices = tuple(data_indices[q] for q in target_axes)
    input_indices = work_indices + used_data_indices
    output_indices = list(data_indices)
    for w, t in zip(work_indices, target_axes):
        output_indices[t] = w

    all_indices = set(input_indices + data_indices + tuple(output_indices))

    return np.einsum(
        left_matrix,
        input_indices,
        right_target,
        data_indices,
        output_indices,
        # We would prefer to omit 'optimize=' (it's faster),
        # but this is a workaround for a bug in numpy:
        #     https://github.com/numpy/numpy/issues/10926
        optimize=len(all_indices) >= 26,
        # And this is workaround for *another* bug!
        # Supposed to be able to just say 'old=old'.
        **({'out': out} if out is not None else {}),
    )

def targeted_conjugate_about(
    tensor: np.ndarray,
    target: np.ndarray,
    indices: Sequence[int],
    conj_indices: Sequence[int] = None,
    buffer: Optional[np.ndarray] = None,
    out: Optional[np.ndarray] = None,
) -> np.ndarray:
    r"""Conjugates the given tensor about the target tensor.

    This method computes a target tensor conjugated by another tensor.
    Here conjugate is used in the sense of conjugating by a matrix, i.a.
    A conjugated about B is $A B A^\dagger$ where $\dagger$ represents the
    conjugate transpose.

    Abstractly this compute $A \cdot B \cdot A^\dagger$ where A and B are
    multi-dimensional arrays, and instead of matrix multiplication $\cdot$
    is a contraction between the given indices (indices for first $\cdot$,
    conj_indices for second $\cdot$).

    More specifically this computes
        $\sum tensor_{i_0,...,i_{r-1},j_0,...,j_{r-1}} *
        target_{k_0,...,k_{r-1},l_0,...,l_{r-1}} *
        tensor_{m_0,...,m_{r-1},n_0,...,n_{r-1}}^*$

    where the sum is over indices where $j_s$ = $k_s$ and $s$ is in `indices`
    and $l_s$ = $m_s$ and s is in `conj_indices`.

    Args:
        tensor: The tensor that will be conjugated about the target tensor.
        target: The tensor that will receive the conjugation.
        indices: The indices which will be contracted between the tensor and
            target.
        conj_indices; The indices which will be contracted between the
            complex conjugate of the tensor and the target. If this is None,
            then these will be the values in indices plus half the number
            of dimensions of the target (`ndim`). This is the most common case
            and corresponds to the case where the target is an operator on
            a n-dimensional tensor product space (here `n` would be `ndim`).
        buffer: A buffer to store partial results in.  If not specified or None,
            a new buffer is used.
        out: The buffer to store the results in. If not specified or None, a new
            buffer is used. Must have the same shape as target.

    Returns:
        The result the conjugation.
    """
    conj_indices = conj_indices or [i + target.ndim // 2 for i in indices]
    first_multiply = targeted_left_multiply(tensor, target, indices, out=buffer)
    return targeted_left_multiply(np.conjugate(tensor), first_multiply, conj_indices, out=out)

_TSliceAtom = Union[int, slice, 'ellipsis']
_TSlice = Union[_TSliceAtom, Sequence[_TSliceAtom]]

def apply_matrix_to_slices(
    target: np.ndarray,
    matrix: np.ndarray,
    slices: Sequence[_TSlice],
    *,
    out: Optional[np.ndarray] = None,
) -> np.ndarray:
    """Left-multiplies an NxN matrix onto N slices of a numpy array.

    Example:
        The 4x4 matrix of a fractional SWAP gate can be expressed as

           [ 1       ]
           [   X**t  ]
           [       1 ]

        Where X is the 2x2 Pauli X gate and t is the power of the swap with t=1
        being a full swap. X**t is a power of the Pauli X gate's matrix.
        Applying the fractional swap is equivalent to applying a fractional X
        within the inner 2x2 subspace; the rest of the matrix is identity. This
        can be expressed using `apply_matrix_to_slices` as follows:

            def fractional_swap(target):
                assert target.shape == (4,)
                return apply_matrix_to_slices(
                    target=target,
                    matrix=cirq.unitary(cirq.X**t),
                    slices=[1, 2]
                )

    Args:
        target: The input array with slices that need to be left-multiplied.
        matrix: The linear operation to apply to the subspace defined by the
            slices.
        slices: The parts of the tensor that correspond to the "vector entries"
            that the matrix should operate on. May be integers or complicated
            multi-dimensional slices into a tensor. The slices must refer to
            non-overlapping sections of the input all with the same shape.
        out: Where to write the output. If not specified, a new numpy array is
            created, with the same shape and dtype as the target, to store the
            output.

    Returns:
        The transformed array.
    """
    # Validate arguments.
    if out is target:
        raise ValueError("Can't write output over the input.")
    if matrix.shape != (len(slices), len(slices)):
        raise ValueError("matrix.shape != (len(slices), len(slices))")

    # Fill in default values and prepare space.
    if out is None:
        out = np.copy(target)
    else:
        out[...] = target[...]

    # Apply operation.
    for i, s_i in enumerate(slices):
        out[s_i] *= matrix[i, i]
        for j, s_j in enumerate(slices):
            if i != j:
                out[s_i] += target[s_j] * matrix[i, j]

    return out

def partial_trace(tensor: np.ndarray, keep_indices: List[int]) -> np.ndarray:
    """Takes the partial trace of a given tensor.

    The input tensor must have shape `(d_0, ..., d_{k-1}, d_0, ..., d_{k-1})`.
    The trace is done over all indices that are not in keep_indices. The
    resulting tensor has shape `(d_{i_0}, ..., d_{i_r}, d_{i_0}, ..., d_{i_r})`
    where `i_j` is the `j`th element of `keep_indices`.

    Args:
        tensor: The tensor to sum over. This tensor must have a shape
            `(d_0, ..., d_{k-1}, d_0, ..., d_{k-1})`.
        keep_indices: Which indices to not sum over. These are only the indices
            of the first half of the tensors indices (i.e. all elements must
            be between `0` and `tensor.ndims / 2 - 1` inclusive).

    Raises:
        ValueError: if the tensor is not of the correct shape or the indices
            are not from the first half of valid indices for the tensor.
    """
    ndim = tensor.ndim // 2
    if not all(tensor.shape[i] == tensor.shape[i + ndim] for i in range(ndim)):
        raise ValueError(
            'Tensors must have shape (d_0,...,d_{{k-1}},d_0,...,'
            'd_{{k-1}}) but had shape ({}).'.format(tensor.shape)
        )
    if not all(i < ndim for i in keep_indices):
        raise ValueError(
            'keep_indices were {} but must be in first half, '
            'i.e. have index less that {}.'.format(keep_indices, ndim)
        )
    keep_set = set(keep_indices)
    keep_map = dict(zip(keep_indices, sorted(keep_indices)))
    left_indices = [keep_map[i] if i in keep_set else i for i in range(ndim)]
    right_indices = [ndim + i if i in keep_set else i for i in left_indices]
    return np.einsum(tensor, left_indices + right_indices)

class EntangledStateError(ValueError):
    """Raised when a product state is expected, but an entangled state is provided."""

def partial_trace_of_state_vector_as_mixture(
    state_vector: np.ndarray, keep_indices: List[int], *, atol: Union[int, float] = 1e-8
) -> Tuple[Tuple[float, np.ndarray], ...]:
    """Returns a mixture representing a state vector with only some qubits kept.

    The input state vector must have shape `(2,) * n` or `(2 ** n)` where
    `state_vector` is expressed over n qubits. States in the output mixture will
    retain the same type of shape as the input state vector, either `(2 ** k)`
    or `(2,) * k` where k is the number of qubits kept.

    If the state vector cannot be factored into a pure state over `keep_indices`
    then eigendecomposition is used and the output mixture will not be unique.

    Args:
        state_vector: The state vector to take the partial trace over.
        keep_indices: Which indices to take the partial trace of the
            state_vector on.
        atol: The tolerance for determining that a factored state is pure.

    Returns:
        A single-component mixture in which the factored state vector has
        probability '1' if the partially traced state is pure, or else a
        mixture of the default eigendecomposition of the mixed state's
        partial trace.

    Raises:
        ValueError: if the input `state_vector` is not an array of length
        `(2 ** n)` or a tensor with a shape of `(2,) * n`
    """

    # Attempt to do efficient state factoring.
    try:
        state = sub_state_vector(
            state_vector, keep_indices, default=RaiseValueErrorIfNotProvided, atol=atol
        )
        return ((1.0, state),)
    except EntangledStateError:
        pass

    # Fall back to a (non-unique) mixture representation.
    keep_dims = 1 << len(keep_indices)
    ret_shape: Union[Tuple[int], Tuple[int, ...]]
    if state_vector.shape == (state_vector.size,):
        ret_shape = (keep_dims,)
    elif all(e == 2 for e in state_vector.shape):
        ret_shape = tuple(2 for _ in range(len(keep_indices)))

    rho = np.kron(np.conj(state_vector.reshape(-1, 1)).T, state_vector.reshape(-1, 1)).reshape(
        (2, 2) * int(np.log2(state_vector.size))
    )
    keep_rho = partial_trace(rho, keep_indices).reshape((keep_dims,) * 2)
    eigvals, eigvecs = np.linalg.eigh(keep_rho)
    mixture = tuple(zip(eigvals, [vec.reshape(ret_shape) for vec in eigvecs.T]))
    return tuple([(float(p[0]), p[1]) for p in mixture if not protocols.approx_eq(p[0], 0.0)])

def sub_state_vector(
    state_vector: np.ndarray,
    keep_indices: List[int],
    *,
    default: np.ndarray = RaiseValueErrorIfNotProvided,
    atol: Union[int, float] = 1e-8,
) -> np.ndarray:
    r"""Attempts to factor a state vector into two parts and return one of them.

    The input `state_vector` must have shape ``(2,) * n`` or ``(2 ** n)`` where
    `state_vector` is expressed over n qubits. The returned array will retain
    the same type of shape as the input state vector, either ``(2 ** k)`` or
    ``(2,) * k`` where k is the number of qubits kept.

    If a state vector $|\psi\rangle$ defined on n qubits is an outer product
    of kets like  $|\psi\rangle$ = $|x\rangle \otimes |y\rangle$, and
    $|x\rangle$ is defined over the subset ``keep_indices`` of k qubits, then
    this method will factor $|\psi\rangle$ into $|x\rangle$ and $|y\rangle$ and
    return $|x\rangle$. Note that $|x\rangle$ is not unique, because scalar
    multiplication may be absorbed by any factor of a tensor product,
    $e^{i \theta} |y\rangle \otimes |x\rangle =
    |y\rangle \otimes e^{i \theta} |x\rangle$

    This method randomizes the global phase of $|x\rangle$ in order to avoid
    accidental reliance on the global phase being some specific value.

    If the provided `state_vector` cannot be factored into a pure state over
    `keep_indices`, the method will fall back to return `default`. If `default`
    is not provided, the method will fail and raise `ValueError`.

    Args:
        state_vector: The target state_vector.
        keep_indices: Which indices to attempt to get the separable part of the
            `state_vector` on.
        default: Determines the fallback behavior when `state_vector` doesn't
            have a pure state factorization. If the factored state is not pure
            and `default` is not set, a ValueError is raised. If default is set
            to a value, that value is returned.
        atol: The minimum tolerance for comparing the output state's coherence
            measure to 1.

    Returns:
        The state vector expressed over the desired subset of qubits.

    Raises:
        ValueError: if the `state_vector` is not of the correct shape or the
            indices are not a valid subset of the input `state_vector`'s indices
        EntangledStateError: If the result of factoring is not a pure state and
            `default` is not provided.

    """

    if not np.log2(state_vector.size).is_integer():
        raise ValueError(
            "Input state_vector of size {} does not represent a "
            "state over qubits.".format(state_vector.size)
        )

    n_qubits = int(np.log2(state_vector.size))
    keep_dims = 1 << len(keep_indices)
    ret_shape: Union[Tuple[int], Tuple[int, ...]]
    if state_vector.shape == (state_vector.size,):
        ret_shape = (keep_dims,)
        state_vector = state_vector.reshape((2,) * n_qubits)
    elif state_vector.shape == (2,) * n_qubits:
        ret_shape = tuple(2 for _ in range(len(keep_indices)))
    else:
        raise ValueError("Input state_vector must be shaped like (2 ** n,) or (2,) * n")

    keep_dims = 1 << len(keep_indices)
    if not np.isclose(np.linalg.norm(state_vector), 1):
        raise ValueError("Input state must be normalized.")
    if len(set(keep_indices)) != len(keep_indices):
        raise ValueError(f"keep_indices were {keep_indices} but must be unique.")
    if any([ind >= n_qubits for ind in keep_indices]):
        raise ValueError("keep_indices {} are an invalid subset of the input state vector.")

    other_qubits = sorted(set(range(n_qubits)) - set(keep_indices))
    candidates = [
        state_vector[predicates.slice_for_qubits_equal_to(other_qubits, k)].reshape(keep_dims)
        for k in range(1 << len(other_qubits))
    ]
    # The coherence measure is computed using unnormalized candidates.
    best_candidate = max(candidates, key=lambda c: np.linalg.norm(c, 2))
    best_candidate = best_candidate / np.linalg.norm(best_candidate)
    left = np.conj(best_candidate.reshape((keep_dims,))).T
    coherence_measure = sum([abs(np.dot(left, c.reshape((keep_dims,)))) ** 2 for c in candidates])

    if protocols.approx_eq(coherence_measure, 1, atol=atol):
        return np.exp(2j * np.pi * np.random.random()) * best_candidate.reshape(ret_shape)

    # Method did not yield a pure state. Fall back to `default` argument.
    if default is not RaiseValueErrorIfNotProvided:
        return default

    raise EntangledStateError(
        "Input state vector could not be factored into pure state over "
        "indices {}".format(keep_indices)
    )

def to_special(u: np.ndarray) -> np.ndarray:
    """Converts a unitary matrix to a special unitary matrix.

    All unitary matrices u have |det(u)| = 1.
    Also for all d dimensional unitary matrix u, and scalar s:
        det(u * s) = det(u) * s^(d)
    To find a special unitary matrix from u:
        u * det(u)^{-1/d}

    Args:
        u: the unitary matrix
    Returns:
        the special unitary matrix
    """
    return u * (np.linalg.det(u) ** (-1 / len(u)))


TDS, Propertymark and AIIC are all worried that inventory quality will dip as agents try to cut costs after June 1st.
The headquarters of the Tenancy Deposit Scheme in Hemel Hempstead, Hertfordshire, has been gutted by a major fire.
Do you know which is the busiest day of the year for letting agents? Well it's coming soon – here's a guide from TDS on how to get through it.


text:
Subscribe to Rabbi Y
Learning & Values Questions & Answers Jewish Ethics & Morality
Is Judaism Socialist or Capitalist?
What exactly is our ideal society?
By Tzvi Freeman
Dear Ask-the-Rabbi Rabbi,
With the current presidential elections in the U.S., there's been a lot of debate about Judaism, socialism and capitalism, since one of the candidates—the Jewish one—identifies himself as a "democratic socialist." Some Jewish voters are claiming socialism is not Jewish, while plenty of others associate their socialism with their Judaism and vice versa.
What do you say? Is Judaism socialist or capitalist?
—Sandy Bernard
The obvious answer is yes.
If you think rabbis can't agree on anything, you ought to listen to economists arguing. Both capitalism and socialism come in more flavors than Starbucks can serve coffee and tea—with the distinction that nobody quibbles over which cup is coffee and which is tea. But economists—they're the guys sitting there in Starbucks arguing whether the cup from which they're sipping contains a socialist tea or a capitalist coffee.
So let's deal with just two major areas which socialists and capitalists generally perceive quite differently. One is ownership of property (who owns what I got). The other is the right of the state to redistribute wealth (government as the grand steamroller). We'll start by looking at two cases that deal respectively with these two issues.
The Vineyard Case
If you want a great demonstration of the right to individual property in Torah, read the biblical story of the vineyard of Naboth. On the other hand, if you want a clear picture of the origin of the socialist idea in Europe, read the story of the vineyard of Naboth.
King Ahab, the wickedest king of Israel ever, had seen the vineyard of a simple citizen named Naboth and desired it. When he offered to purchase it, Naboth replied, "G‑d forbid that I should surrender to you land which has always been in my family."1
What does Ahab do? He returns to his palace, lies in his bed and cries. I mean, he's wicked, but he's still Jewish, and Naboth is right. When the children of Israel had entered the land with Joshua, they had divvied it up in equal portions, rendering all Israelites landed and equal citizens—as G‑d had prescribed through Moses. You couldn't sell a parcel of land—you could only lease it until the Jubilee year, which came once in 50 years.
Meanwhile, Jezebel, Ahab's non-Jewish wife, can't figure out what's going on here. Why doesn't he just man up like any real king, kill the peon for his insolence and take his field?
Fettered as she is by these ludicrous Jews she has come to live amongst, yet driven by loyalty to her husband's desires, Jezebel conceives a plan, hiring witnesses to testify falsely against Naboth as a blasphemer so that he can be executed and his land confiscated. After Ahab's followed his wife's instructions, Elijah the prophet famously rebuked him, "So says G‑d: You have killed, and you have also taken possession!?"2
So here you see that in biblical law your property is your property—because it can't be taken from you. And yet it's not your property—because you can't give it away.
How could both be true? Quite simply, as the Torah itself explains, "because the land belongs to G‑d." Meaning that Torah can grant you ownership of your property because it's not yours. There is a third party involved, one who is not a member of society, who neither benefits or loses through any transaction, and is concerned only that justice reign—and that is G‑d, and He owns everything.3
Is the Hebrew Bible a Socialist Doctrine?
What does this have to do with socialism? Everything. What was once the textbook version of history tells us that the socialist idea arose in France and England in the 19th century. But in his recent groundbreaking work The Hebrew Republic, Eric Nelson, noted American historian and professor of government at Harvard, traces the idea back to an influential 17th-century work of an Englishman named James Harrington, The Commonwealth of Oceana. He was the one to first advocate the idea of fair redistribution of wealth—basically, that the government could and should take from the rich to give to the poor in order to maintain a balance of wealth in society.
So where did Harrington get it from? The institution of the Jubilee year. In Harrington's understanding, the point behind this return of land was to maintain a balanced, if not perfectly equal, distribution of wealth. And since this law was "made by an infallible legislator, even G‑d Himself," it must be applicable to all nations at all times.
Neither the Jubilee year nor any similar form of redistribution of property was instituted in Europe. But once the idea that the republic had the right and responsibility to redistribute wealth had leaped out of the box, thinkers from Montesquieu to Rousseau, Jefferson to Tocqueville, could play with it, Saint-Simon could give it the name "socialism," and Karl Marx could take it to its most extreme extent—once entirely uprooted from its biblical origins.
European socialism did not originate in Roman or Greek jurisprudence, nor did it arise out of "pure reason" of 19th-century political thinkers. The roots of socialism are firmly grounded in a Torah institution. But ironically, it was the same Torah institution that guaranteed each individual inalienable rights to his property.
If you want an idea of how central a theme that concept of property is in Torah, you need only turn to the very first verse, "In the beginning, G‑d created the heavens and the earth."
And if you want an idea of how central fair distribution of property is in Torah, you need only turn to the very same verse again.
Why does the Torah begin with the story of creation and of humankind, rather than simply presenting the dos and don'ts? Rashi, the most classic of Torah commentators, explains: To tell you that the earth belongs to G‑d. He gives it to whoever He finds fit to give it to, and takes it from them and gives it to others when He finds that fit.
You own your property—not by Divine right, but by Divine lease.
The Case of the Tall Date Palm
Now let's talk about giving to those less fortunate. If you ask a capitalist, "Do I have to provide for those less fortunate?" he will likely exclaim, "Of course not! I mean, it's a nice thing to do, but hey, it's your hard-earned money, right?"
Yes. And no.
Because, although it's the job of the Creator and Manager of the Universe to give to whoever so deserves, G‑d quite often leaves the act of justice in our hands, so that we will have a partnership in this act of property distribution. Which means that we own property in order that we can distribute it justly. And, in fact, in the Hebrew language, there is no distinction between charity and justice. In Greek and Latin, they are two distinct entities. In Hebrew, justice is tzedek and charity is tzedakah—two forms of the same verb.
Which means that charity is not a nice thing to do. Charity is an obligatory thing to do.
Here's a vivid example: Let's say you're a farmer (for most of history, most of us were farmers). You have a nice plot of land growing crops. Do they belong to you?
Again: Yes and no.
No, because some of those crops belong to the priestly class (who don't have any fields, just houses in cities), and some belongs to people who are too poor to feed themselves. Yet it's left up to you to distribute those crops as they should be distributed. Whatever is left, you get to keep.
For example: Joe the farmer has an orchard of date palms. As prescribed by Torah, he has put aside dates of a tall palm for the poor.
Now ten poor people are standing around this tall and slender date palm, staring way up at the dates above.
"Let's go for them!" one says.
"Race you to the top!" says another.
"Too dangerous," says another.
"But they're ours for the picking!" says yet another.
"Not quite," an erudite poor person explains (indeed, many of the most important scholars and lawmakers of Israel were exceedingly poor). "It's the owner's obligation to give them to us. And we don't have to risk our lives to climb up there and get them."
So they call the owner, who dutifully must ascend the tree and distribute its dates to the poor.
And get this: Even if nine of the ten—or 99 out of 100—are ready to forgo their rights and climb the tree themselves, as long as there's one who says, "Nope, too dangerous. You gotta go up there!" we listen to the one dissenter. Because that's the law: It's the owner's obligation to ensure these dates get to their proper owners—namely, whichever poor people come for them.4
More Jewish Socialism
There are many more such examples. In Jewish law, if a person is starving, he is permitted to take the food of another person—since that person has an obligation to provide the starving person food. If you see the other guy's property being destroyed, you are obligated to do what you can to prevent the destruction. Again: it's not a nice thing to do. It's an obligation.
In actual practice, such has been the practice of Jews from biblical times to the present day. In the fourth century, when the Roman emperor Julian ordered the setting up of hostels for transients in every city, he referred to the example of the Jews "in whose midst no stranger goes uncared for." Historical records from every era, wherever there were Jews, provide long lists of societies—free loan funds, soup kitchens, wedding funds, widow funds, orphan care, new mother care, free education and much more. There wasn't a Jew who wasn't either giving or getting—and often both.
Maimonides, the great codifier, wrote in the 12th century that every Jewish community must have two funds for the poor: One, called the kupah, an obligatory fund supported by every member according to their means; the other, called tamchui, to collect food and other items from those who gave voluntarily. "We have never seen nor heard," he writes, "of a Jewish community that does not have a kupah for charity."5
But what's important to note is even with the presence of the voluntary kupah, according to all codifiers of Jewish law the "state"—in the form of the community's popularly appointed beit din—had the right and obligation to enforce involuntary giving and taxation in order to help the destitute in their community, and even in other communities as well. Coercion was rarely necessary—and we'll discuss why later. But it was certainly was practiced.
As for the prevalent capitalist view, it's ironic that the father of the libertarian idea, John Locke himself, wrote otherwise:
But we know that G‑d hath not left one man so to the mercy of another that he may starve him if he please. G‑d, the L‑rd and Father of all, has given no one of His children such a property, in His peculiar portion of the things of this world, but that he has given his needy brother a right to the surplusage of his goods, so that it cannot justly be denied him when his pressing wants call for it.6
In other words, Locke, to whom we most owe the idea that each man has a natural right to life, liberty and property, also gave your "needy brother" the right to your surplus of goods—not out of your mercy, but by justice. Whose justice? The justice of the same One who provided you with those goods to begin with.
Fascinating: Scholars search for a source in the Christian Bible for Locke's contention. In a fascinating article entitled Locke and Political Hebraism, Fania Oz-Salzberger dismisses their search as futile. "Only the Hebrew Bible . . . ," she writes, "could support this legalist, non-voluntary approach to the relationship between the wealthy and the starving, thanks to its unique model of an altruistic community rooted in law."7
Serfdom & Freedom
There are many more such examples. Professor Yehudah Levi's essay "Is the Torah Capitalistic or Socialistic"8 and his sequel to that, "The Right to Private Property,"9 examines the question through the lens of halachah, focused primarily on tax laws. His conclusion? "Judaism is capitalism with a socialist spirit."
Now, that may sound peculiar. Because in most people's minds today, capitalism and socialism are two extremes of a long pole—and you can't hold onto both ends at once. Most of us understand the issue to be all about "Who owns what I got?" Capitalism means I own what I got (taxes being a kind of membership dues in return for fair benefits). Socialism means society (i.e., government) owns all I got—just that they're gracious enough to let me keep some of it.
In the Mishnah, there's a description of just that. That concept of capitalism is called "What's mine is mine and what's yours is yours." And that concept of socialism is called "What's mine is yours and what's yours is mine."
So how do you create an elegant harmony from two such conflicting statements?
And the answer is that you can't. As long as you are looking from the frame of reference of "what do I own?" capitalism or socialism remain two opposite worlds. Furthermore, neither of them provides a sustainable framework for society. In fact, in the Hebrew language, there is no verb "to own." You can be the master (baal) of a property, or take possession of it, but none of these terms imply absolute ownership.
Whose frame of reference is "what do I own?" It's that of a freed serf. That's where these conceptions were born—from the liberation of the serfs and working class in 17th–19th century Europe. They may have thrown the shackles off their arms and legs, but they failed to remove them from their minds. They remained obsessed with rights, because they began as slaves. They remained obsessed with taxes, because that's what governments seem to be all about—if property was to be distributed fairly, it had to be the government that would confiscate and distribute it.
In the mind of the freed serf, whatever solution could come about had to come from the top down—meaning, government—because that lordly power loomed so large in the background of all their thinking that they simply could not imagine reality without it.
In The Road to Serfdom, Friedrich Hayek saw the rise of socialism, Nazism and fascism in 20th-century Europe as just that: a regression. The serfs were demanding, "Please re-enslave us!" Socialism was, and remains, another form of shirking responsibility, by handing all responsibility back to a bloated government. Socialism, in most of its forms, attempts the absurd: to liberate people by divesting them of their responsibilities and the power to run their own lives.
The Responsible Society
Shift now to Sinai. The people are free. Their taskmasters have been dumped in the sea and washed ashore. Now they have to form a society. How is it formed? Through a covenant between the people—each and every individual—and the one G‑d to whom each is accountable for his or her actions.
That's why there's no talk of rights in the Torah. Everyone, by default, has all the rights of the first human being ever created. Rather, Torah speaks of responsibilities.
The taxes that the Torah speaks of are the responsibility of the individual—to provide for the poor, the Levite, the orphan and the widow. Sure, if you don't give what you are supposed to give, the court can come and confiscate it from you—but that's not the default. The default is you, as a private individual, giving the prescribed amount—and a little more–of your own volition.
As for government, the Torah gives it relatively little significance. Yes, the rabbis instituted takkanot ha-shuk—price ceilings, measures to keep staple foods at reasonable prices—and penalized those who failed to provide their fair share for the poor. The court sat in the marketplace judging case by case to keep law in order. But those were supplementary measures.
Clear evidence: Anyone who has studied the monetary laws of the Talmud is struck by the prominent place of the oath in this system. Without the institution of the oath, the entire judicial system of monetary law crumbles to pieces. Every piece of it is built on an assumption that the great majority of citizens—no matter how great a financial loss is as stake—would not be able to hold a Torah scroll and make a statement before a Jewish court that is blatantly false. This is an assumption that relies heavily on the moral education of the people. And that is just the point: A society can be fair, just and ethical only when the populous receive an ethical education.
That explains why the Torah is obsessed not with government, but with another institution—its primary institution, because it truly is the primary institution of any free society. And that is the moral and ethical education of its citizens, by its citizens. Because authentic education—turning out responsible and sensitive citizens who are inspired to social justice—is inherently a bottom-up, grassroots project, and the only path to a just and fair society is from the bottom up.
Jews do not call the founder of their society "Moses the Lawgiver" or "Moses the Governor," but "Moses, our teacher." What other nation was formed by a man who is called "our teacher"?
And who were the men who forged the law of Torah into a code to function throughout the ages, who legislated its application in everyday life? The rabbis of the Mishnah and the Talmud were not a ruling class, but by and large men who tilled their own fields, pruned their own vineyards or were occupied in some craft or trade. They were of the people themselves.
When we shift the historical paradigm from slaves throwing off their shackles to free people forming a society, we also shift the engine of this society from governance to education. But that also requires shifting our understanding of capitalism and socialism—to frame it not in terms of ownership, but rather in terms of our responsibilities to one another and the betterment of society.
In those terms, put it like this: Capitalism is the idea that people can work together to create and increase value. Socialism is the idea that the more we share that value, the more we create. No conflict. Just harmony.
For a society to be just and its citizens to be free, education has to go beyond ABC and 123—beyond treating human beings as brains transported by bodies. Education under an oppressive regime inculcates pupils with duty to the motherland and crushes any sense of individuality. Education for freedom and justice must focus on turning out kids with sensitivity, responsibility and accountability—sensitivity to the needs of others, responsibility to their society and accountability for their actions.
It's that last one—accountability—that's the clincher. Without it, the other two crumble. Rabbi Menachem Meiri, a halachic authority of the 13th century, made this very clear when he described idolaters as "godless people" unrestrained from any evil. In his mind, idolatry was not a matter of how many gods you believed in, or what you believed about those gods. It was a matter of having no authority, no moral accounting. Christians who believe in the trinity, Rabbi Meiri writes, do not fall in this class. Whatever it is that they believe, their religion holds them accountable to a Higher Authority for their actions.
The Rebbe, Rabbi Menachem M. Schneerson, of righteous memory, gave that sentiment a very practical application in our times, insisting on
the vital need that the children in the public schools should be allowed to begin their day at school with the recitation of a nondenominational prayer, acknowledging the existence of a Creator and Master of the Universe and our dependence upon Him. In my opinion, this acknowledgment is absolutely necessary in order to impress upon the minds of our growing-up generation that the world in which they live is not a jungle, where brute force, cunning and unbridled passion rule supreme, but that it has a Master Who is not an abstraction, but a personal G‑d; that this Supreme Being takes a "personal interest" in the affairs of each and every individual, and to Him everyone is accountable for one's daily conduct.
Or, to quote one the most significant of the early architects of the modern free state and the fathers of enlightenment, John Locke:
If man were independent, he could have no law but his own will, no end but himself. He would be a god to himself, and the satisfaction of his own will [would be] the whole measure and end of all his actions.10
Sensitivity and responsibility are wonderful character traits. But you remain your own god. You—or your society—are left to determine just whom you should be sensitive to, and whom not; what are your responsibilities, and what are not. And the coin is always going to flip to the side that provides greatest convenience and satisfaction.
Just like "G‑dless socialism," so too "G‑dless capitalism" runs amok, as each man is for himself and those with more power and smarts rip off the little guy by whatever means they can. Only through accountability to a higher power do human beings transcend their own prison of self—and become capable of forming a global society where the measure of all actions is our responsibility to one another.11
The earth and all that it contains—and whatever we produce from it—belongs neither to you or to me. It belongs to the One who created it. We are planted here "to work it and to protect it." We are its stewards. All of us, as one. That is what we much teach our children, and they will have a bright future indeed.
Ultimately, the ideal of Torah, the messianic era, is a kind of socialist anarchy, where there is no need for governance because everyone is enlightened, even wolves keep their paws off the lambs, and the monarch's role is to provide yet greater wisdom. May that time become real much sooner than we can imagine.
I Kings 21:3.
I Kings 21:19.
For an in-depth discussion of the revolutionary impact the agrarian laws of the Bible had on 17th-century thought, see Eric Nelson, The Hebrew Republic (Harvard University Press, 2010), ch. 2.
Mishneh Torah, Hil. Matnot Aniyim 2:16.
John Locke, First Treatise §42.
Fania Oz-Salzberger, "The Political Thought of John Locke and the Significance of Political Hebraism," in Gordon Schochet, Fania Oz-Salzberger and Meirav Jones, eds., Political Hebraism (Shalem Press, 2008), p. 248.
B'Or HaTorah 8 (2013): 113–119.
B'Or HaTorah 9 (1995): 83–87.
This is from a handwritten note (Bodleian Library MS, Locke c. 28, fol. 141), quoted in John Dunn, Political Thought of John Locke (Cambridge University Press, 1969), p. 1.
Yes, I know I will be receiving plenty of reader comments noting that religion has been responsible for the perpetration of some of the worst crimes against humanity (although not as criminal as those perpetrated by the secular ideologies of the 20th century). My response is that, religion—perhaps. G‑d—no. As evidence, see the study performed by one of the foremost experts in terrorism, director of ARTIS research Scott Atran: Jeremy Ginges, Hammad Sheikh, Scott Atran and Nichole Argo, "Thinking from God's perspective decreases biased valuation of the life of a nonbeliever" (Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences 113, no. 2 (12 January 2016): 316–319.
Tzvi Freeman is the author of Bringing Heaven Down to Earth and, more recently, Wisdom to Heal the Earth. Subscribe to The Daily Dose of Wisdom and Freeman Files for regular updates.
More from Tzvi Freeman | RSS
Can I Use Grandma's Parking Permit?
Moneylending and Jewish Law
Can a Serial Shoplifter Make Amends?
Can I Secretly Monitor My Child's Social Media?
What Is the Torah Perspective on Safe Spaces, Trigger Words and Political Correctness?
Take Wall Street, Please!
Rethinking capitalism, OWS and 7B
Prayer in Public Schools and Separation of Church...
Is Socialism Kosher?
Proto-Socialist Resonances in Chassidic Thought
Watch (45:07) 2 Comments
Chabad and the Essence of Socialism
Watch (17:52)
Jf NYC January 17, 2021
There are many things that socialistic countries have that I agree with. Healthcare for all adding a public option in affordable health insurance for those with low income as long as they can pay for it. Another is a subsidized well planned national passenger rail road system. Reply
Grandma is over there USA November 2, 2020
My friends are scared either way, what will happen after the election. I am nervous, I must admit. The capitalisms' here has been too much. Prices are sky high. My private insurance is also sky high.. Drs are allowed to charge so much thanks to whoever regulates prices. I just finished paying for two of my kids bills at well over $500 total.This was for two specialist derm visits.
Socialism is also crazy scary. Then the small ruling class will rule over e everyone.
There are obviously no simple solutions. but it's crazy.
Will it be possible for large and medium corporations to take into account that the middle class cannot afford to eat, pay mortgage or rent and other tings and still have a normal life? Reply
Leonard M. Melman Nanoose Bay, BC, Canada December 21, 2020
in response to Grandma is over there:
Dear "Grandma": I believe you are correct in declaring that your friends are scared for what will follow upon the election, but I disagree when you say that, "There are obviously no simple solutions." There is one and it should be so obvious that everyone would subscribe to it if only they were aware of its power. I am referring to freedom or liberty.
It is the power of government to rule over the populace that is the greatest threat to a life of harmony and decency because with their ever-expanding powers, the government becomes able to provide unearned and undeserved rewards - for which people will pay - and to enact controls which will add to the power of the socialist ruling class.
It has always been that way with socialism - and there is no reason to expect the Biden version, supported by the Clintons, Obamas, Harrises, et al will be any better for individual liberty. Reply
M.Steinman London October 30, 2020
"(who owns what I got)." presupposes ownership where there is none. Reply
Mike Defreitas Bradford October 9, 2020
Moral education is inherently tied up with socioeconomic affordances. The more stressed financially you are, the more dispirited and melancholy your life will be, and hence, the more complicated your relationships will become. The moral health of individuals is not an inherently "bottom-up" process, but a mixture of bottom-up and top-down influences.
Early childhood development - developmental psychology and developmental neuroscience - have established fairly clearly that the first two years of brain development have massive consequences for the development of the rest of the personality (i.e. temperament, affect regulation, etc). The significance of this early-life period is too important to leave it to the moral whim of people who are often being misled by a society which intoxicates them with "fun"; for this reason, capitalism, however "fun" it can be to generate vast swathes of money and power for individuals, needs to be counteracted and constrained by society. Reply
Greg C Olinger Colorado November 6, 2020
in response to Mike Defreitas:
I disagree, Striving for success and self reliance creates structure in your life. It gives purpose in your life and it benefits all. God has blessed everyone with different abilities. How you use those gifts and what makes you happy is why God gave us freewill. Reply
Mike Defreitas Bradford November 29, 2020
in response to Greg C Olinger:
But the same God created a world where feedback loops exist. The rich are better advantaged than the poor because of the opportunities available to them to preserve and extend their wealth. The same thing with anything else: the infant raised by loving parents will absorb a loving and playful way of being, which in turn will make him more enticing and inviting to others, which will help him make friends more easily. These are systems effects - they derive from how the world is structured and how such structure imposes fundamental constraints on what is and isn't probable. What could be more Godly than to extend your awareness beyond yourself and focus on the larger structure of things - is that not, in the end, what God is: the totality of everything that is, and how the various phenomena of the world interact and influence with one another? Unregulated Capitalism is nothing more than a criminal racket that exploits systems to the benefit and aggrandizement of a very small group. Reply
Greg Olinger Colorado December 6, 2020
Charity is in God's design but we should have a choice. Socialism does not benefit the many it benefits a few at the top. Forcing people to pay for others is a form of slavery and the epitome of evil. Reply
Mike Defreitas Bradford December 20, 2020
in response to Greg Olinger:
Your second statement is literally the reverse of the truth: socialism creates the checks and balances that are absent within a free market capitalist system. That said, I think a mixed system acknowledges the opposing impulses that animate human lives: liberty (to choose our actions) and responsibility (to the life of others). I don't think you properly recognized or understood what I meant by "system effects". Capitalism allows runaway positive feedback loops - similar to how a development which promotes self esteem (i.e. one where the people around you are consistently responding to you with love, care, and joy) serves to attract strangers to experience you in an enticing or inviting way. This is the equivalent of "the rich get richer". Fact is, human beings are very complicated creatures, and without the more educated and morally aware helping the less educated and morally ignorant, positive feedback loops (i.e. greed, ignorance as to how reality and humans work) etc, will dominate Reply
Greg Olinger Parachute December 30, 2020
Actually Socialism creates mediocrity, you said it yourself. The way the world is structured is that everyone is different which is human nature. The one things liberals have issues with is human nature and mother nature. You are worried about other People's situations instead of worrying about yourself. While in fact capitalism has brought more People out of poverty than any other time in history. You look at these Countries that have socialism and they are miserable. Their People are basically a slave to their government. I equate socialism more towards Islam, their theocracy also uses their religion along with their government to control their populace. Also why do you think God needs us to help others? God does not need us for anything, we need him. When God gave us Freewill, what is the key word there? Free he allowed us to make choices in our lives. We do not need our government or others to tell us what to do. If we follow God's plans we can choose to give. Reply
JF Georgia July 28, 2020
I'm disappointed that you lean rabbi Tzvi more towards socialism since the socialism you describe has never and won't ever exist until Mashiach is here. You need the capitalism to be able to generate money that supports the giving society. Capitalists by your narrow view are selfish and not generous. An unfair generalized characterization. Too many Jews are capitalists in their earning power and extremely generous. How could they donate so freely without the capital to do so.
If we're being honest socialism as far as history illustrates creates poverty. Doesn't the Torah say that it is one of the worst things to experience since it can cause you to sin?
I find that that's what socialists are stingier and more self serving for all of their self righteous calls for spreading the wealth around. I'm a happy capitalist who enjoys sharing my money since it's not mine. It's Hashem's.
There is no such thing as a democratic socialist. The candidate is wealthy. Period. Reply
in response to JF:
Yet the vast majority of capitalists aren't religious Jews. Humans are social animals. We're organized according to non-linear dynamics that reinforce bad habits and bad traits.. It seems idealistic, then, to overlook the real suffering - poverty, disease, and the cultures such conditions enforce in those communities - capitalism creates (i.e by inculcating a self-focused orientation to living), rather than realizing the benefits that would accrue to the socially and financially disadvantaged. Ultimately, brain development - or "affect regulation" - is deeply connected to early life development, and so long as we keep our heads in the sands in relation to this issue, the relational problems of early life development will continue to promote the wrong sorts of cultures for the majority of people, even though a few are so fortunate - or afforded by circumstances - to grow in ways that allow them to develop morally, we shouldn't assume that ethical development is an individual affair. Reply
You realize that Socialism/Communism has killed 100s of millions right? Reply
Leonard M. Melman Nanoose Bay, BC, Canada November 6, 2020
Greg:
You are dead on in this comment and let us not forget that the dreaded Nazi party was also socialistic. I wonder how many people realize the true name of that party was (approximately) the "Nazional Zoscialistiche Deutche Arbeiter Partei" or "National Socialist German Workers' Party." Well, unless the (manipulated?) election results are overturned, Americans and many others will find out over the next four years just what happens when rampant socialists take over the running of a great nation. For most citizens, we can forget about Hashem's 'free will' as every American's life will be directed by ever-growing numbers of laws, regulations and directives emanating from a massively powerful centralized bureaucracy. That is what resulted from socialist takeovers of nations such as Germany, Russia, Communist China, Venezuela and Cuba. Why should anyone believe America will be any different?
Hang on to your freedom hats. They are most likely to be blown away in coming years.
Sandy Roehampton June 15, 2019
The question really is, which nation's people have prospered in truly socialist aka communist economic system. Answer: None. So why even discuss this oppressive unreasibable concept?.
- The Chinese Communist Party now enable individual private ownership of property, business and items. They are mainly now capitalist with a good amount of government ownership
- Examples such as Norway are erroneous with a total population smaller than most cities, and excessive government wealth from past oil ventures. It is very different in a scenario of huge national debt and large populations.
- Wealth redistribution (other than sales tax), for everyone other than an individual with 100m+, is simply morally wrong.
- The ability for only uber wealthy peoole to shelter tax (due to cost barriers) is also wrong Reply
RABBI MOSHE OTERO Fort Lauderdale May 10, 2019
Socialism is not a Monarchy Now that is indeed an oxymoronic statement.. A socialist anarchy, the messianic time is a time where a Monarch will rule, not some sort of democratic socialism nor communist regime, chas vshalom. Reply
Tzvi Freeman May 10, 2019
in response to RABBI MOSHE OTERO:
An oxymoron is a statement in which apparently contradictory terms appear in conjunction. It's not clear to me which statement was considered contradictory.
Perhaps what you meant to ask is how I could consider the messianic era to be a socialist anarchy when a king will be ruling. The question, however, is quite the other way around: What is the need for a king when the "spirit of impurity has been removed from the earth" and "the entire occupation of the world will be to know G-d"?
So, as I wrote--and this is really a published statement of Rabbi Yosef Yitzchak of Lubavitch--the role of the king will be to teach the people wisdom that transcends their intellect, for even at that time, and forever more, there will always be more to learn, as G-d and His wisdom are infinite. Reply
Rabbi Moshe Otero Hollywood June 25, 2019
in response to Tzvi Freeman:
Florida You make an interesting point reason why the idea of a monarchy is prior to the establishment of the messianic era where the spirit of impurity will be removed by Hashem after the establishment of the Davidic Monarchy. No doubt All of the the social obligations and laws will return and restored as it was without changes in the normal pattern of thing. Not as socialism nor as capitalism but a Torah mandated economy. That is what I meant by your statement of an oxymoronic. A Torah economy which is unique when the true Mashiach arises which has not yet been revealed nor has arrived even in a potential sense as indicated by the Rambam.
Thank you for your response to my comment
Kol Tuv, Reply
Mike Defreitas Bradford December 6, 2020
What you wrote in your second paragraph appears to contradict what you wrote in the third paragraph. In the second paragraph you make much sense. Indeed, wouldn't the abolition of the spirit of impurity itself be contingent or dynamically connected to the mode of social organization and the forms of relating that such social organization favors between human beings? If anarchic socialism is the form of self-regulation favoring self-aware human beings (who in becoming self-aware, are now embodying the spirit of G-d), then how exactly does a king also exist? Maybe the whole idea of "king messiah" is a reference to a more psycho-ontological concept where humans understand that in being subsystems of a more larger 'communal mind', that the "king messiah" would be synonymous with what's otherwise referred to as the 'shekinah', that is, an emergent collective 'self'. Since the self is a creation of the infinite G-d, this Self intermediates between every individual self and the infinite G-d. Reply
Mariniel April 30, 2019
Recently a heard a philosopher explaing the core difference between the left and the right being: "the left is obsessed with equality, the right is obsessed with hierarchy". I think the Torah values both views, but capitalism per se is void of mechanisms to limit inequality, on the contrary, if left unchecked,all property will be on the hands of a singular, super successful family. I also don't believe that the so called "real socialism" is much different than capitalism.
And I don't see the point for the existence of a billionaire who does not know or even care about the origin of his money, or the hard work put by thousands of people, engaging in all sorts of activities unrelated to his wealth (like being president of US) and still being able to enjoy the security granted by the labor of an army of workers, unaware of how much of their work is actually going to the billionaire's bank account.
Should be a limit to a person's wealth? What Torah says about that? Reply
Tzvi Freeman April 30, 2019
in response to Mariniel:
There are definite limits set on the wealth and power of a king in Parashat Shoftim. Problem is, kings usually feel they can disregard the rules—as do presidents.
But again, the central institution of a Torah society is not its government, but education. That's the main point: A society must educate its children in the ethics of tzedakah and empathy. Reply
Anonymous United States May 1, 2019
Very good points. Like anything else, what Torah says can help people immeasurably or it can be twisted. Where we live, there are extreme beliefs on the right and left. Happens to be a very Jewish area, so we see extremes on both sides. Happens to also have a nice Orthodox community. Therein lies some extreme republicanism. It is beyond sad to see people who believe they know Torah looking for reasons/ways/excuses, to do what they want with little regard to others. And find ways to claim this is fine. Don't push the line towards; mine is mine and yours could and maybe should be mine. Having lived most of a life caring about others, and being moderate, it's easy to spot those who don't realize they're selfish and don't get Judaism. I know this took a twist, but I had to point out what I could see often if I did more business with people who succumb to a lack of real Torah values. Emphasis on real. Reply
J Fleming GA November 6, 2020
'Capitalism per se is void of the mechanisms to limit inequality'? Huh? What mechanisms are needed? You can achieve as much wealth as your hard work, ambition etc can get you. You can learn and grow. Get mentors. Loans. People who were born into poverty have become millionaires. People wothout much education have as well. What more do you want? A guarantee of success? Why? What does it mean or prove if everyone can have everything with little effort - just because?
Or favoring socialism - everyone can be in the same "equal" boat of limited everything. No upward mobility. No aspirations of greatness. No creativity. No "the sky is the limit" mentality. I'll take capitalism wrinkles and all.
I suggest listening to Dr. Thomas Sowell on the concept of equal outcomes. Quite brilliant. Born into poverty. Achieved greatness. With what - five degrees? Hmpfh Reply
Gregory Olinger Parachute December 20, 2020
in response to Anonymous:
Actually the only real way you can help others that are unfortunate is if you are in a position to help them yourself. Whether it is creating jobs for others or contributing to them through charity, You have to be self reliant too. Capitalism has brought more People out of poverty than any other type of economic system. Also in America the very basics of our judicial system is created on the 10 commandments. God is our driving force and is the reason why we have been blessed in the past. We have supported Israel since they came back as a nation. As you see now as socialism is on the upswing, also is the anti-semitism in this Country. Socialism is not good for America and it definitely does not support Israel. Reply
Avraham Keslinger Ofra October 14, 2018
One can widen the question to which kind of socialism or capitalism. There is libertarian socialism where businesses are workers' cooperatives free of state control. There is stock market capitalism where shares in companies are owned by investors who elect directors to run them. As employee pension funds are the largest stock owners in the US it can be said that its economy is in some ways capitalist and in some ways socialist. Reply
Harvey WNY August 21, 2018
First, Judaism preceded all isms, including Capitalism, and Socialism. Secondly, Socialism is not a worker's mechanism nor a system of public ownership of capital because then it is not Socialism but something different. Perhaps the development of an elastic method, since it seems that all attempts at defining Socialism tend to evoke a rigid form of life when in reality Socialism has evolved into specific fundamental rights, health, housing, and a mean income. Ironically sounds quite similar to the precepts of Zionism and the Kibbutz. The Socialism read about here seems to be simple government control of the means of production and human needs. A "benevolent" government is required or an oligarchy develops into tyranny and worse. The Torah offers the answers of government and human interaction. Without drilling down Judaism is more than simply a religion but a way of life with equality and quite a bit more. An interesting subject would be the differences of Judicial Law, Common Law. Reply
Leonard M. Melman Nanoose Bay, BC August 23, 2018
in response to Harvey:
When you say that people have certain "rights" that are to be provided by someone else - whether those 'others' wish to provide them or not - you are not describing an enlightened society, you are describing a ruthless, government-dominated oligarchy of the bureaucracy backed up by the police state. Milton Friedman had it right when he entitled his famous book, "Free To Choose". You do not want freedom of choice. You want coercion by the state in order to enforce your stated goals. That is not freedom - and without freedom we are nothing but slaves. Reply
BRIAN J MAGUIRE WEST LINN August 29, 2018
The one thing that the proponents of socialism ignore is human nature. Reply
Howard Wright Jacksonville September 1, 2018
in response to Leonard M. Melman:
So very true. Reply
Mariniel Galvao Jr May 20, 2018
Socialism is a worker's movement that dared to say income ought come only from one's own work and capital should be owned by everyone collectively. It turned out that this arrangement is politically very dificult, specially because the absolute minority that owns capital, also owns the State, domestically or abroad. This poses all kinds of complexities and usually ends up in some kind of authoritarian regime. Reply
Avraham Keslinger Ofra August 30, 2018
in response to Mariniel Galvao Jr:
What about the time, effort and capital put in by the owners? Reply
Anonymous Lexington, MA March 5, 2018
I have a simple question to pose to this august group:
What do you call it when you are forced to give all of your productive output for the benefit of others? ie: 100% taxation of all your work.
My answer: It is called slavery.
What happens when the government forces you to work 5 months of the year for the sole benefit of others while they require others to only work 1 month (or not at all)? Is this not "partial slavery"?
In the words of "tax policy" is a progressive tax equivalent to the partial enslavement of some for the benefit of others? Reply
Anonymous Israel & USA March 13, 2018
You actually posed three questions, then answered them each yourself, so perhaps it seems you might not really be interested in anyone else's answer/s, or for that matter any thoughts on the matter or upon any or all the questions... Yet on-topic, socialism and capitalism are systems rendered by man for the purpose of control, and slavery is not defined by whether or not someone voluntarily, or subserviently, pays a tax; as slavery is the subjugation of a person's existence. Reply
Anonymous USA August 20, 2018
a flat tax is not "subjugation" - everyone is treated equally. "Subjugation" is when I am forced to work for the society (under penalty of imprisonment) and others are not not forced to labor for society.
In the days before we created a financial system, people were required to be drafted into the service of the king (ie: society) a fixed number of time per year. (ie: a 'flat tax') Reply
Anonymouse Cheeseater Martians Landed Down the Street February 27, 2018
Give me liberty or give me tacos. only during Simcha week. Sorry peeps, had to go there. I think Jews should always consider those who have less. And many do. Reply
Not Your Son's DNA Florida August 21, 2018
in response to Anonymouse Cheeseater:
Tacos with fake cheese? Anyway, many Jews consider those who have less, what happens after that, it changes over time. We live in hardcore repub, and hardcore dem times. In the 70s, in some places in the US, welfare was common. Now people complain, who should and who should not receive welfare, as they called it. "The pendulum swings both ways." I look forward to more moderate times, less mine is mine and yours is mine. Humble thoughts from someone who grew up in the 70s. Reply
Leonard Melman February 23, 2018
The one word I have not seen here is 'freedom'. I will say that forcibly collected taxation upon the threat of property seizure or even imprisonment for any disobedience is anti-freedom to the core. A great Jewish scholar named Milton Friedman wrote a book entitled "Free To Choose" and in those three words we have the very definition of freedom. I always thought Judaism operated on the concept of "free will", meaning we choose to follow Hashem or not based on our own free will. Our manner of government should practise the same principles and one of them is that charity - the first 'commandment of Jewish life - should be voluntary - not coerced. Reply
Charlie Hall Bronx February 23, 2018
in response to Leonard Melman:
The Jewish Rabbinic Tradition in fact is that charity is coerced if necessary. The eighth chapter of Tractate Peah sets up mandatory collections -- basically, taxes -- for support of the poor. Maimonides declares this to be binding halachah and adds that he has ever heard of a community that did not have such a system -- anyone who refuses to pay gets flogged and has their property confiscated.
Milton Friedman himself was not a religious Jew but he accepted the necessity of mandatory taxes and even said that it would be appropriate for the government to force citizens to purchase health insurance.
And of course all through the Rabbinic writings there are examples of Jews being forced to follow HaShem's will, by being flogged or fined if necessary.
Finally, it should be noted that the Babylonian Talmud holds that there is more merit in doing something that one is commanded than in doing a good deed voluntarily. Reply
Anonymous April 20, 2019
Living in the U.S and a father of 3 daughters who haven't even reached their teenage years I am in full agreement. I fear a possible future that coercion is synonymous with death Reply
Avi Keslinger Ofra, Israel February 24, 2018
in response to Charlie Hall:
Socialism and capitalism do not refer to the presence or absence of public charity. In fact, both Friedrich hayek and Wilhelm Roepke supported a social safety net for the truly needy (as opposed to a system that perpetuates poverty). Capitalism is predicated on private ownership and control (as opposed to fascism where there is private ownership but state control) of the means of production. Socialism is predicated on public ownership (although there is also libertarian socialism where businesses are workers' cooperatives free of state control). In Judaism there is no public ownership with the exception of public goods such as the communal synagogue. Reply
Leonard M. Melman February 25, 2018
No wonder so many Jews embrace socialism, despite the fact that the murdered victims of Marxist-Socialism number in the hundreds of millions and the vast majority who have lived under coercive socialism have lived their lives out in relative poverty. Just ask the people of China, Russia/USSR, North Korea, Zimbabwe, many other African nations, Cuba, Venezuela and so forth. As them how wonderful it was to live where you are told where you can go, what you can read, why you can never openly express an anti-socialist opinion in public, etc.
For me, I truly believe in the swaying, "Give me liberty or give me death." Or, in the terms of the Torah in Leviticus 25 - "You shall...proclaim liberty throughout all the land to all its inhabitants." While I am well aware the quote relates to the Jubilee year, I also believe the words mean Hashem did not intend for us to be subservient drones but rather human beings with the right to live our lives freely. Reply
Anonymous US August 20, 2018
The mandatory contribution for charity was a fixed percentage - the rich paid the same percentage as the poor.
A "progressive tax" can be only characterized as "theft". Reply
Charles Hall Bronx February 27, 2018
in response to Avi Keslinger:
Well said. Torah Judaism is probably most like Welfare State Capitalism than either laissez-faire or socialism. Reply
The UK and Israel were more socialist than Zimbabwe or Venezuela and were not police states. And Rabbinic Judaism does not talk about rights, it talks about obligations.
The Torah is not socialist, but it is very hostile to libertarianism as well. Reply
Liberty in Judaism is not a license to do what one pleases. It is freedom to act according to one's nature despite one's evil inclination. For a Jew that means the entire corpus of Torah and Rabbinic law as well as customs that developed over the years. For a gentile that means the sheva mitzvot. Reply
Charles B Hall Bronx August 6, 2019
The Torah quote you give is about freeing slaves and reversing all land purchases, not ending taxes. Reply
Wrong. See Rambam Hilchot Matanot Aniyim Chapter 9, Halachah 1. Chabad.org has an English translation online. It is based on Yerushalmi Peah Chapter 8. Reply
Bob Light Lex July 25, 2017
The issue in the USA of socialism vs. capitalism is not a question of whether or not social safety nets should be paid for out of tax dollars - we have a capitalistic system with a great deal of socialist programs overlaid.
The question in the USA is to what degree should socialist programs redistribute wealth? Is it the governments role to forcibly take money from the wealthy (in the form of taxes) and give it to the poor so that the poor can afford a flat screen TV, cellphone, a car...etc? Reply
? February 19, 2018
in response to Bob Light:
So people should starve so someone can relieve themselves in a gold toilet? Reply
Chazal and Rambam definitely demand at least some redistribution of wealth. I gave sources above. Reply
Robert Light Lexington August 20, 2018
in response to ?:
Nobody "starves" in America, and if someone wants to waste their money on a gold toilet - that is their choice, and the maker of the gold toilet is pleased to make the sale. Reply
Bob Light Lexington, MA July 25, 2017
Just a corrective note: The Jubilee year is not really a notion of redistribution of wealth since the land, if sold, is priced based on the number of years left until the Jubilee year - if there are more years, the price is higher, fewer years, the price is lower. At one minute before the Jubilee, the price is essentially zero since the land's ownership would revert back 60 seconds after the sale took place. Reply
Essentially the Yovel laws prohibit free markets in land. This is not socialist but it definitely is not laissez-faire. Reply
Brian Maguire West Linn, OR July 18, 2017
Great piece - I as a Catholic, I appreciate seeing a similar but different view. I understand where and why the left in the US is coming from with the socialism. I don't agree with it, I personally think giving is a personal choice, but I do now understand why many think it needs to be compulsory. The Sanders effect. I would like to here thoughts on Sander's, an ethnic Jew but also an atheist who seemingly would not believe in a higher power. Reply
Charles B. Hall Bronx July 19, 2017
in response to Brian Maguire:
Sanders does not appear to be an atheist. He has publicly recited blessings to God on Chanukah. Reply
Jürgen Friedrich Germany July 20, 2017
@Brian - you "as a Catholic" will probably agree that Protestants (like me) are as reformed Catholics. Both of us are "reformed Jews".
Beides, inside the Jewish Community, every & all are reformed, too, at least more or less. To what ? To continue learning ! Reply
Heather USA July 26, 2017
in response to Charles B. Hall:
I'm sorry but Chanukah blessings does not a Jew make. And he's a politician. He can kiss babies and say whatever words he wants. If you told me he attends almost every year on Yom Kippur I would probably give in to your way of thinking. Reply
Brian Maguire West Linn July 24, 2017
in response to Jürgen Friedrich:
It was called the reformation. Reply
Debby of DeNial East Coast Baby January 15, 2017
Humble Thoughts from the Coast A Please ask a Rabbi who is a mensch if it is so bad to give to the poor. Ask your self why you have problem with it? Are you aware of a number of people with mental and physical disabilities who cannot make 5K or 200K or even work? I know 6 sets of parents who adopted kids whose kids cannot work full time. # are on the autistic spectrum. 3 have IQs below 80. If you make 300K or more be very very thankful. If you make 150K or more be very very thankful you can work and think at higher level. Don't whine about it anymore. It's not always your business!! Just feel blessed to live in a country where 45K is poor not $45 a year. Reply
Steve LA July 21, 2017
in response to Debby of DeNial:
I am now getting this Debby. I didn't have an upbringing where I could understand that many people make less than 100K, far less.
My parents always had businesses when the kids got to middle school. I no longer care what others make. It's as if it is their business and not mine. My wife and I work hard, teach our children to have a work ethic and pray that they value family and money and not just money. Health matters too. We have met people who have kids working at the local supermarket. If they are working, all the better. Reply
Leonard M. Melman Nanoose Bay, BC February 26, 2018
You are missing an absolutely essential point. No one writing on this site has said it is 'bad to give to the poor'. That has never been the question. The question is whether it is right for the government to DEMAND that you give through coercive taxation enforced in a "pay up or we'll bash your teeth in" manner through threatened property seizure or even imprisonment. I prefer that giving be voluntary.
By the way, your example of the adoptive parents fails on an important test. When those parents decided to adopt handicapped children, they had no right to assume that the taxpayer would be coerced into stepping in to support them.
Freedom through voluntary action is superior to coercive being forced to 'do good'. It is that simple. Reply
Anonymous US of a April 29, 2019
If you are a good person with any Jewish background it is not that simple. Although it is simple to you. Reply
Chazal and Rambam definitively demand that government force you to give to the poor. According to Rambam if you don't like that you don't get your teeth bashed in but you get flogged and you get your property confiscated. See Hilchot Matanot Aniyim, Chapter 7, Halachah 10.
The Babylonian Talmud in more than one place states that one who is commanded to do something and fulfills the commandment is greater than someone who is not commanded and does the same thing. While this is not a totally unanimous position in Jewish sources (the Jerusalem Talmud at one point implies the opposite) it is normative Jewish teaching. Freedom to do what you feel like doing is absolutely not a Jewish value. Reply
Very Very Good Perhaps is also worth quoting the famous story that when a few Jews were on a train discussing which political idea is closest to Judaism, and as the Previous Rebbe, Rabbi Josef Isaac Schneersohn was on the train, hence they approached him… his reply sums it up best, "The goodness in each." Reply
Avi Keslinger Ofra, Israel January 8, 2017
Moshe, so what is your choice for the term? Rav Kook wrote that there will be "true socialism" which he defined as rich people engaging in real partnerships with poor people rather than doubtful heter iskas. So it seems that there will still be income gaps and private ownership but the haves will seek to put the have-nots on their own feet. Being that Rambam at the end of Hilchot Melachim says that the world will be filled with knowledge of Hashem and people will do His will it would seem that here will be no need for coercive government although there might still be judges to pasken honest disagreements. Reply
G‑d and Us
Mitzvot & Jewish Customs
Kabbalah & The Mystical
On The Prophets and Scriptures
Judaism on Medical Ethics
Jewish Ethics & Morality
Moshiach and the Final Redemption
Vedibarta Bam
Ask "Rabbi Y"
Jewish Quizzes
Moment of Silence (26)

redpajama_set_name: RedPajamaCommonCrawl


A review of Masterchef 2012 champion Shelina Permalloo's charming restaurant. Need we say any more?
The Tandoori Tea must be good with three trips already since they opened in November.
A cafe with a bakery making this unlike any cafe you're likely to encounter elsewhere.
How cool is that? There's plenty of breakfast options including Desi and Turkish, and more.
Opening at 9am, there's all-day breakfasts as well as grab-and-go sandwiches.


Uschi A master of field recordings and EA micro-sounds is back with a double album. Buy physical copies, you don't wanna spoil your listening experience with a computer hum. Favorite track: psychetal 3.
former available as 2CD-R / SOLD OUT !
Over the course of more than two decades, Slavek Kwi aka Artificial Memory Trace has developed a body of work that encompasses live performance, sound installations, music and sound workshops with autistic children, and of course a large number of recordings published by small labels around the globe. This double CD in Attenuation Circuit's Reissues series makes available again two albums originally published in 2004 that are characteristic for Artificial Memory Trace's style of electroacoustic music that is characterised by a very elegant use of field recordings.
As the project name says, Artificial Memory Trace is always conscious of the fact that field recordings from nature are never natural in themselves, but become artificial in the very process of recording. Thus, even the toads that can be heard on "Paradox of Paradox" are not simply left to speak for themselves or "nature" per se, as in many pieces of "acoustic ecology" recordings. Instead, the recordings are subtly arranged to make an abstract compositional statement. Other sound sources include Christmas carols, a dysfunctional piano, and, on "Interception", a dialogue of whistles between Kwi and an autistic child. One theme of both albums then seems to be an investigation into the ways that communities of different species, from amphibians to humans, make sense of their condition through sound. Philosophical considerations apart, the musical attractiveness of these works is based on the treatment of the field recordings which always retain just enough crispness to be recognisable as ambient noises, keeping the listener's ears pricked up trying to find out their possible origins, while at the same time constantly being on the verge of vanishing into singing oceans of frequencies at times reminiscent of the later phases of Alvin Lucier's "I am sitting in a room".


text:
Q: Excel formula: counting array elements with a criteria I have an array, which is the result of the multiplication of two COUNTIF functions.
The result is {0,2,7,4,0}. I want to count the number of non-zero elements. I tried the following:
=COUNTIF(COUNTIF*COUNTIF,">0") <- here the two inner COUNTIFs are short for the complete formula
It did not work. I then tried the following, which did not work either.
=COUNTIF({0,2,7,4,0},">0")
I resorted to using the following array formula and it worked.
{=SUM(IF(COUNTIF*COUNTIF>0,1,0))}
Two questions:

*

*does COUNTIF only accept cell reference but not constant array?

*any solution other than array formula?

Thanks.

A: *

*The first argument of COUNTIF must be a range, nothing else will do.

*You can just enter this as an ordinary formula:
=SUM(--({0,2,7,4,0}>0))

*However when the array comes from a calculation, you need to coerce it to process all the elements either
=SUM(INDEX(--(A1:A5>0),0))
or like @Jeeped with Sumproduct
=SUMPRODUCT(--(A1:A5>0))

redpajama_set_name: RedPajamaStackExchange


After many breakout fiaschi and failed attempts to conceal dull, dry skin on my travels, I have mastered the art of keeping my skin happy on long-haul flights. With zero shame, I start whipping out an arsenal of skincare products and fashion a mini spa session mid-flight – it's 2019, and it's called self-care. Aside from drinking plenty of water, here are seven products that will help you get radiant skin even after a long haul flight.
The Bioderma Sensibio H2O is the answer to all my prayers. The micellar cleansing water is powerful yet gentle on the skin. It removes makeup and impurities without leaving any sticky residue – unlike makeup wipes. God forbids you use bathroom water to wash your face!
Once you have a clean canvas after wiping off impurities with the micellar water, spray a hydrating mist to help fight the overly dry air – you can also do this throughout the flight. Your skin will thank you for it. My favorite mist to help replenish my skin is the Caudalie Beauty Elixir. I have been using it for many years and, I recommend it all the time. Another more wallet-friendly mist that I really enjoy is the Mario Badescu Facial Spray.
Mist sprayed, now on to your favorite sheet mask – My favorite facemask are from Dr. Jart +, Sephora (especially the Avocado Face Mask,) and Farmacy. They leave my skin hydrated and ready for landing!
I'm glad to see the jade roller had finally made its way to the U.S. When I was younger, I got one on my trip to China and loved massaging my face with it. Although unaware of its real benefits, I used it all the time because of the cooling and relaxing sensation. Now that I'm wise and older, I can tell you all about its benefits. As soon as you remove your facemask, massage your face with the jade roller to tone your skin, de-puff, and improve circulation. It also helps your skin soak in the moisturizers and serums.
And to lock everything in, a face oil! Add a few drops on your hands and rub them together to warm it up. Then, gently press it on your cheeks, chin, and forehead. At the moment, I'm obsessed with Darphin Tangerine Aromatic Care – a rejuvenating essential oil serum. The natural oil leaves my skin glowing, and it smells incredible, which adds to the spa vibes we are going for. Other favorites include the Biossance Squalane + Vitamin C Rose Oil and Korres Wild Rose Vitamin C.
Let's not forget the lips! Apply a nourishing balm to keep them moisturized and glossy. On my last trip, my lips were desperately crying for help, went to Sephora, and asked for the best lip treatment. I was recommended Bite Agave Lip Balm. I never looked back. It is by far the most nourishing and protective lip balm I have ever used – it's a must in my makeup bag. If you are planning to travel anywhere cold this winter, don't go without it! It also comes in Mask format, which you squeeze out of a tube and apply with your fingers.
Lastly, your hands! I like using hand cream on the heavier side while traveling because of my frequent use of hand sanitizer – am I the only one that sanitizes the entire plane seat? My favorite hand cream is the L'Occitane Hand Cream 20% Shea Butter. It's not too greasy and it absorbers quickly. Another favorite is the Clarins Hand and Nail Treatment.
And that completes our mid-flight spa treatment! Do you have any other recommendations? Let me know in the comment section.


Canada and the United States have announced sweeping measures aimed at restricting most oil and gas permitting off their respective Arctic waters, the countries' leaders announced Dec. 20 in a joint statement.
Following the creation of the U.S.-Canada shared Arctic leadership earlier this year, Prime Minister Justin Trudeau has now committed to designating all Canadian Arctic waters as "indefinitely off limits" to future offshore Arctic oil and gas licensing.
That policy is to be reviewed every five years, the prime minister's office said Dec. 20.
For its part, the U.S. is designating most U.S. waters in the Chukchi and Beaufort Seas off limits to oil and gas leasing, President Barack Obama announced in the joint statement.
At the launch of the Shared Arctic leadership model, both leaders affirmed goals to protect at least 17 per cent of Arctic land areas from development and 10 per cent of marine areas by 2020.
At the same event, Obama and Trudeau pledged to build a sustainable Arctic economy, one that meets high environmental standards and respects the livelihood of its Indigenous population.
The framework will include priority areas, the statement said, such as infrastructure, education and economic development and the environment—namely, the "last ice area" where summer ice remains each year.
Canada also reiterated its plans to reduce the reliance of northern communities on diesel by investing in renewable power.
• Canada and the U.S. commit to a legally-binding agreement to prevent unregulated commercial fisheries in the Arctic High Seas until a internationally-recognized management plan, currently in the works, is in place.
Over the last year, the U.S. and Canada say they've consulted widely on Arctic issues, in the process finding "a strong desire for real and long-term opportunities to build strong families, communities and robust economics," the statement said.
It's unclear, however, if Obama's commitments will hold under a new Trump administration and Republican-controlled Congress next year.


When it comes to climate change and the need for strong, immediate action to combat it, you can't get much clearer than this statement today by UN Climate Chief Christiana Figueres.
You've probably heard the falsehood spread by dirty energy interests that renewable energy portfolio standards are costly. Well, a new report say it's simply not true.
Cross-posted from The Great Energy Challenge.
Thanks to Our Troops. Now Let's Honor Them by Getting Off of Oil.
With this morning's news that Al Qaeda leader and 9/11 mastermind Osama bin Laden has been killed by U.S. special operations forces, first and foremost we wanted to say "thank you" to America's troops around the world. In particular, our deepest gratitude to those who have served in Afghanistan and, of course, in the "Seal Team 6" that carried out the operation against bin Laden. The valor that they displayed in this operation represents the very best of America.


Talbenny is situated about six miles west of Haverfordwest, on the south side of St. Bride's bay. The men of the area who fell during the Great War are commemorated on a marble plaque, inside St. Mary's Church. The Church also houses a Memorial to the men of R.A.F. Talbenny, who were killed whilst operating from the base during World War Two.
Albert Warlow, Sapper, 19902, Royal Engineers. Albert was born at Talbenny in 1886, the son of John and Mary Warlow. The family later moved to Chepstow, Monmouth. He enlisted at Merthyr Tydfil into the Royal Engineers, and served with the 56th Field Company, attached to the 3rd Division. One of the first Divisions to move to France, they remained on the Western Front throughout the war, and fought during the opening Battle of Mons, and in the epic retreat, from the Rearguard Action of Solesmes, through the Battle of Le Cateau, and down to the Marne, where the German Offensive was stopped. They followed the German withdrawal to the Hindenburg Line, where they met them in battle, and stopped the advance on Paris. The Division then moved north to Flanders, and took part in the Battle of La Bassée, and at the Battle of Messines, which were a prelude to the First Battle of Ypres. Albert was taken ill here, and died on 25 November 1914. He was 28 years old, and is buried at Cement House Cemetery, Belgium. Albert is not commemorated on the Talbenny Memorial.
TO THE GLORY OF GOD and in honoured memory of those who lost their lives during flying activities from or at R.A.F. Talbenny and whose names are recorded on this memorial.
787536 Sgt. H. Dostal, D.F.M., age 23. RAFVR Czechoslovakian Pilot.
82591 Flt. Lt. M. Cigler, age 28. RAFVR Czechoslovakian WOP.
787335 Sgt. J. Holub, age 21. RAFVR Czechoslovakian Air Gunner.
787081 Sgt. F. Dovak, age 28. RAFVR Czechoslovakian Air Gunner.
787088 Sgt. V. Orlik, age 25. RAFVR Czechoslovakian Air Gunner.
787612 Sgt. R. Pancir, age 27. RAFVR Czechoslovakian Pilot.
82587 Flt. Lt. K. Becvar, D.F.C., age 24. RAFVR Czechoslovakian WOP.
787359 Sgt. J. Drmelka, age 25. RAFVR Czechoslovakian Pilot.
787171 Sgt. J. Lenc, age 25. RAFVR Czechoslovakian Pilot.
787104 Sgt. V. Sobotka, age 28. RAFVR Czechoslovakian Air Gunner.
787885 Sgt. F. I. Sipula, age 28. RAFVR Czechoslovakian WOP/ AG.
787894 Sgt. P. Tofel. RAFVR Czechoslovakian WOP/ AG.
82520 Flt. Lt. A. Gabriel, age 20. RAFVR Czechoslovakian Observer.
787844 Sgt. O. Jebacek, age 24. RAFVR Czechoslovakian WOP.
68734 F/O R. Matejicek, age 29. RAFVR Czechoslovakian WOP/ AG.
787414 Sgt. J. Deradil, age 25. RAFVR Czechoslovakian Pilot.
83230 Flt. Lt. J. Dyvlt, age 26. RAFVR Czechoslovakian Pilot.
787884, Sgt. J. Simko, age 22. RAFVR Czechoslovakian WOP/ AG.
1322585 P/O P. Friedlaender, age 31. RAFVR Czechoslovakian AG.
1196247 F/Sgt. G.F. Hitch, age 22. RAFVR Pilot.
656794 Sgt. K. Jones, age 22. RAF Observer.
131535 P/O F. Bulis, RAFVR Czechoslovakian Pilot.
787458 F/Sgt. J. Blaha, age 33. RAFVR Czechoslovakian Pilot.
787452 F/Sgt. F. Dolezal, age 28. RAFVR Czechoslovakian A/G.
142325 P/O J. Jebacek, age 21. RAFVR Czechoslovakian A/G.
82640 Flt. Lt. V. Student, age 24. RAFVR Czechoslovakian Pilot.
131533 P/O B. Gissubel. RAFVR Czechoslovakian WOP.
87773 Cpl. F. Paclik, age 36. RAFVR Czechoslovakian FME.
788152 F/Sgt. J. Svec, age 36. RAFVR Czechoslovakian Pilot.
131534 P/O. A.L. Bunzl. RAFVR Czechoslovakian WOP/ Flying Duties.
787915 Sgt. W. Gotzlinger, age 31. RAFVR Czechoslovakian Inst Rep.
788193 Sgt. V. Rajecky, age 22. RAFVR Czechoslovakian A/G.
83237 Flt. Lt. V. Harika, age 22. RAFVR Czechoslovakian A/G.
787216 Flt. Sgt. F. Stoklasek, age 28. RAFVR Czechoslovakian Fitter.
787498 Sgt. J. Cech, age 31. RAFVR Czechoslovakian Electrician.
118529 P/O G.S. Leemans, age 49. RAFVR Belgian Transport Officer.
1118934 Sgt. J. Billing, age 28. RAFVR Pilot.
1048198 Sgt. A.B. Fawcett, age 20. RAFVR Navigator.
R.67252 W.O. H. Sharpe, age 27. RCAF Pilot.
1152181 F/Sgt. J. Fowler, age 22. RAFVR Navigator.
787345 F/Sgt. M. Cervinka, age 28. RAFVR Czechoslovakian Pilot.
131545 P/O. A. Holna, age 29. RAFVR Czechoslovakian WOP.
787343 Sgt. Z. Janda, age 30. RAFVR Czechoslovakian WOP/AG.
132964 P.O. J. Jelinek, age 22. RAFVR Czechoslovakian Navigator.
788126 Sgt. L. Kriz, age 30. RAFVR Czechoslovakian AG.
788149 Sgt. J. Stiess, age 28. RAFVR Czechoslovakian Pilot.
114382 F/O. K.C.R. Maskell, age 30. RAFVR Pilot.
P15128 Brigadier V. Dykes, C.B.E., age 44.
P6266 Brigadier G.M. Stewart, age 42.
131792 P/O. A. Perrott, age 20. RAFVR Navigator B.
1027584 F/Sgt. H.E. Tyas, age 27. RAFVR Pilot.
1386980 Sgt. E.F.J. Oliver, age 22. RAFVR Navigator.
R.101981 F/Sgt. G.J. Rankmore, RCAF Air Gunner.
931715 F/Sgt. M.N. Williams, age 32. RAFVR WOP/ Air Gunner.
1390572 Sgt. A.E. Carter, age 22. RAFVR Pilot.
1334969 Sgt. R. Whiting, age 20. RAFVR WOP/ Air Gunner.
R.98456 W.O. G.B. Wigle. RCAF Navigator.
J19354 P/O. B. McPherson. RCAF Wireless Operator/ Air Gunner.
1313141 Sgt. W.G. Prosser, age 21. RAFVR WOP/ Air Gunner.
1336888 Sgt. A.G.W. Wright, age 22. RAFVR Pilot.
131858 F/O J.E. Colyer. RAFVR Pilot.
1552315 Sgt. M. Punshon, age 22. RAFVR Pilot.
1264972 Sgt. T.H.W. Cheetham, age 23. RAFVR Navigator.
1316467 Sgt. H.G. Jones, age 22. RAFVR WOP/ Air Gunner.
1048364 Sgt. G.E. Williams, age 23. RAFVR WOP/ Air Gunner.
1239976 Sgt. A. Finnemore, age 21. RAFVR WOP/ Air Gunner.
1330319 F/Sgt. R.F. Best, age 22. RAFVR Pilot.
1316742 Sgt. R.L. Whitlock, age 22. RAFVR WOP/ Air Gunner.
124450 F/O. R.D. Fearns. RAFVR Pilot.
A.416437 F/Sgt. R.J. Letcher, age 25. RAAF Navigator.
1324062 Sgt. J.C. Simpson. RAFVR WOP/ Air Gunner.
1144337 Sgt. J. McCourt, age 22. RAFVR Air Gunner.
A.409554 F/Sgt. D.B. Larkins, age 21. RAAF Pilot.
1250065 W.O. T.J. Mills, age 23. RAFVR Navigator.
1044457 Sgt. B. Stamper, age 22. RAFVR WOP/ Air Gunner.
1144386 Sgt. N. Curry, age 21. RAFVR Wireless Operator.
1317546 F/Sgt. D. Kemp, age 21. RAFVR Pilot.
A.417273 F/Sgt. J. West, age 22. RAAF Air Observer.
1567324 Sgt. W.W. Forsyth, age 21. RAFVR Navigator.
1537020 Sgt. J. Pilling, age 22. RAFVR WOP/ Air Gunner.
J.14844 Flt. Lt. J.N. Punshon, age 27. RCAF Pilot.
1311989 LAC W.R. Tambling, age 26. RAFVR Drogue Op./M.Asst.
Re the burial of an unknown man at Talbenny on the 31st ulto. The Overseer of the Parish should have attended here to register the death previous to the burial as the Coroner bad decided not to held an inquest. The above letters contain the essential facts which completely exonerate my locum tenens. To conclude the story. Sharing the indignation of my locum tenens and parishioners that a man who had given his life for King and country" should be so treated—to put it bluntly: he was buried like a dog in a hole - I at once placarded Little Haven and Broad Haven with notices that I would hold a memorial service by the nameless grave on Sunday at 10.30 a.m. I regret to have to say it, but I personally did not observe that any of the persons who had had a hand in the irregular funeral on the preceding Friday, were present at this service. It was well attended, however, by visitors and a sprinkling of the parishioners. A collection was made in church to place a stone over the nameless grave, The full cost has been contributed- £2 15s. I have even had to return subscriptions which were sent without "canvassing," that fatal failing of our religious and social institutions. This is where the incident stands. How it will terminate it is impossible to guess. That it cannot remain as it is goes without saying. The blame must be placed on the right backs. Decency and patriotism demand that the nameless dead cast upon our shores should be reverently and affectionately laid to rest. Public opinion has not treated my loyal and painstaking locum tenens fairly. I am confident that the full presentation of the facts will go far to rectify this. Certainly in this parish a complete revolution has taken place in opinion and feeling. The blame has been diverted from the Rev. J. M. Williams to other persons. Your unfortunate paragraph based on faulty evidence constrained me to send this full account. I believe your readers will appreciate fact rather than fiction because (1) It is true. (2) It is more sensational.
A. T. WOODMAN DOWDING. Rector, Walton West, Talbenny.
The identity of this man will never be known, but thanks to the efforts of Reverend Dowding, his grave is at least marked by a headstone.


16th April 2014 – It is nice to see progress, to see a raised wall and to have a feeling of a closed room, one part that is nearing its status of being completed. I spent most of the evening finishing the wall. I want to keep the shape and curve of the vessel. it costs more time, but I like the result.


text:
Jim's Steakout project planned for the Town of Tonawanda "dead"
Adventure Landing in the Town of Tonawanda
By: Tim Meehan
TOWN OF TONAWANDA, N.Y. (WKBW) — A plan to bring a new Jim's Steakout location to the Town of Tonawanda is now "dead."
The project would have replaced the Adventure Landing mini-golf park on Sheridan Drive with a new Jim's Steakout, complete with a drive-thru.
When those plans were unveiled in October, some neighbors expressed concerns about the drive-thru's potential impact on local traffic.
But Monday morning, longtime owner Jim Incorvaia told Channel 7 News the project is no longer moving forward.
According to Adventure Landing's website, the mini-golf park and arcade are still operational.


The RVX1000 3D CHIRP Sonar brings RealVision 3D high-powered CHIRP Sonar to Raymarine's new flagship MFD system, Axiom XL. This powerful, all-in-one sonar module ticks all the boxes for "must-have" technologies for coastal and offshore fishing. Every channel delivers stunning underwater imagery that looks amazing on Axiom XL's oversized, full-HD displays.
For years, Furuno's SC30 Satellite Compass has provided highly accurate and stable heading, as well as pitch and roll, rate of turn, and vertical motion data to a vast array of navigation equipment. While the SC30 has delivered precise information to thousands of vessels worldwide, Furuno has still found room for improvement and is announcing a significant upgrade to their original groundbreaking design with the release of the SC33.


text:
/* @license BML - BSD 3 Clause License - Source at github.com/ajyoon/bml - Docs at bml-lang.org */
import { render } from './renderer';

window['bml'] = render;

redpajama_set_name: RedPajamaGithub