I don’t understand two things:

1. Why are they measuring by household? That’s like measuring by cities, and then discovering that cities receive more than small communities. It should be measured per capita, and then the data would look very different. It makes sense that even then the Haredim would receive relatively more, but I assume the gap would be much smaller.

2. Why is this a Haredi problem? How are they different from an artist or a waiter who chose to work in a less profitable job and therefore owe less in taxes, and nobody comes to them with complaints like, “Why aren’t you working in high-tech?” The problem is the socialist policy that doesn’t properly reward those who contribute more to the state. You simply need to change the policy and encourage people to earn more, but it makes no sense to get angry at people who, for various reasons, choose to earn less.

https://m.calcalist.co.il/Article.aspx?guid=bjqb00eev0

1. The parents in a household pay taxes, not the children. In other words, Haredi parents are shifting the burden of raising their children onto the secular and the religious. That’s the claim.
2. Society as a whole is willing and wants to allow individuals the freedom to choose their path in various ways. The Haredim are not individuals within a complete and functioning society, but a separate group that knowingly directs itself (together with a certain level of internal group pressure) to live on the backs of others, they and their children in the previous generation and the one before it, and in this generation and the next one. And the givers—that is not what they are interested in giving. Very simple.

https://m.facebook.com/story.php?id=1400792089&story_fbid=10233542833418291

There’s another point—the overwhelming majority of Haredim who work and pay taxes are working in made-up jobs—neighborhood rabbi, religious court judge, kashrut supervisor, or some arranged job in KKL like Yaki Deri.

If they checked Haredim who pay taxes from work that isn’t through the state, we’d discover that there’s almost no such creature as a tax-paying Haredi.

Actually, I’m not surprised by the numbers.
What did you think, that this is just some annoyance? This is an existential danger to society when a significant portion of it are non-producers and needy (aside from all those who in any case naturally won’t work, such as lazy people, incompetents, homeless people, and the like).

But Gabriel, you wrote utter nonsense. I don’t know what causes it (probably frustration at the damage the Haredim cause), but regarding the Haredim I see that on this site many people become superficial, and every claim against the Haredim is welcomed, while every claim in their favor is necessarily wrong regardless of its content, importance, or relevance.
What you pointed to is a certain problem among the array of problems. But it’s marginal and very, very far from your wording. The data on the Haredi labor market are based on income-tax data, not on sociologists estimating how many Haredim work off the books (which, by the way, is also a problem. But that too is marginal and dwarfed by the central problems), and the data are very different from how you presented them.
By the way, you don’t even need to look at the data to understand that “most working Haredim are in jobs like religious court judge”—that would only make sense if there were 99.7% unemployment among the Haredim (which maybe is actually what you think. And if so, you really do need to look at the data).
As for off-the-books work, you also don’t need to look at sociologists’ estimates. Because
if most Haredim work off the books and you add them to the data on Haredim recognized by the income-tax authorities, you run out of Haredim to fill the numbers.
P.S. The employment rate recognized for tax purposes among Haredi men is around 50%, and among women around 70% (of course that’s a shocking figure and really not enough. In other words—50% unemployment. Yemen is in a better situation. But I assume you thought otherwise).

Wagon Owner,

1. That’s not the correct calculation, because the child brings economic benefit to the state in that when he grows up he will contribute to society through paying taxes. In order to know whether the child will indeed bring benefit or constitute a burden, you need to calculate the per-capita difference over the entire lifetime, which is much more complicated. (Even if we calculate the data presented in the study per capita, the gap looks less severe, with the Haredi person receiving from the state 795 shekels more each month than he gives.)
By the way, to offset the excess in Haredi budgeting it would be enough simply to cancel the Haredi education budget; that would leave the Haredim in a fair position vis-à-vis the state—paying what they receive (though the army issue would still need to be regulated).

2. I don’t understand the difference. Why are an artist or a waiter not “knowingly directing themselves to live on the backs of others,” while the Haredim are? What is the difference between an individual who does this and a group, beyond the fact that it’s easier to get angry at a group?
I agree with you that the givers are not interested in giving this, and therefore instead of getting angry at the Haredim, who as a group are simply doing what at least a third of the country does as individuals, let them kindly abolish the stupid socialist policy that incentivizes people not to bring in money and to rely on the system. Israel learned the idea from the Nordic countries, which are now beginning to see that this policy doesn’t work in a non-homogeneous society—which Israel has been from the moment it was founded.
The Haredim in the U.S. are declared capitalists, because they are not interested in their money being used to fund idle populations living at the expense of the welfare system, and we won’t specify whom, for fear of racism. Only here has the regular socialist system accustomed the Haredim to the current situation, and that is what needs to be fixed, not the Haredim.

The writer in Calcalist himself raises this insight:
“The meaning is that exposing the gaps between the groups is not an accusation against the Haredim; there is no claim here of ‘Haredi extortion,’ but rather bringing to light the fact that the current structure of taxation and government expenditure is built in such a way that a unique group like Haredi society, which makes do with little consumption and has different preferences regarding number of children and use of free time, receives much more than it pays, and much more than other groups in the population. Policymakers need to ask themselves whether this is a structure that is right to continue maintaining. What are its social and economic costs?”

Yossi,

You’re confusing opposition to a person with opposition to an ideology.
There is a huge difference—in severity, in how it should be handled, and in the ability to tolerate it—between a sweeping and foolish idea and a foolish person.

Do you really not distinguish between a homeless person and “the Homeless Party” — with 19 seats, devoutly muttering to themselves that they’re prepared to die for the value of homelessness?

David S.,

In your view, is an ideology of being an artist or a tailor immoral?

I don’t think there is a problem with the ideology itself, but rather that it is not worthwhile for society to encourage it. On the one hand, society wants to allow people to choose different ideologies, but on the other hand, in order to preserve its economic prosperity it is desirable to shape a policy that encourages an ideology (or more accurately, a practice) that advances the prosperity most of society wants. That policy is called “the free market.”

To Yossi,
The state derives no benefit from a Haredi child.
A Haredi child is a bottomless pit of expenses who will grow up to be a burden on the public and bring another 6–7 children who will grow up to be a burden on the public, and they in turn will bring another 6–7 children to be a burden on the public, and so on and so forth…

Of course there are always exceptions, but the overall picture is clear—every Haredi child who, following the words of the Sephardic Chief Rabbi, decides to emigrate to Ukraine is a net gain for the state.

Yossi,

Nobody talked about morality. We were talking about an ideology that is dangerous to our economic existence. I don’t see a moral problem in communism, but I will fight it if it spreads in the country.
Before I address tailors, it’s worth noting that you’re creating a straw man with the equation between a kollel fellow and a waiter or tailor.
But even if the Haredim were a “tailoring religion” and tailoring were their trade, and in that case of course they would be producing far more clothes than could be absorbed, while their labor power (17% of the country) is needed elsewhere, I would come out forcefully against the ideology… and again I’ll remind you, if only the unemployed Haredim were tailors!

Correction: the Haredim are 12% of the general population. Out of the Jewish population it’s much higher {1.2 million out of 7.2)
Be that as it may, it changes nothing.

Gabriel,
I didn’t write that there is a benefit, but rather that in order to know what the cost is, you have to calculate per capita and not per household, since in a household a significant variable is the number of people in it, which differs from sector to sector. It’s like how comparing the overall GDP of countries cannot give us data on their socio-economic condition; rather, you need to compare GDP per capita (compare, for example, the GDP of China to that of Iceland).
I actually think that the Haredi public should separate into an independent autonomy that would pay privately for all the services it consumes from the State of Israel. That way the Haredim wouldn’t be able to complain about this or that “decree,” and on the other hand the rest of the grumbling Israelis would be forced to look for some other scapegoat on whom to pour their frustration…

David S.,
The point is that it’s not the ideology that is dangerous but the stupid policy that encourages it. There is nothing wrong with a “tailoring ideology,” but a state that encourages its citizens to become tailors instead of doctors and engineers will find itself in an economic pit. Should the complaint be directed at the tailor or at the public policy that encourages tailoring?
I don’t understand why this is a straw man. I assume you know that not all Haredim are kollel fellows; most Haredi adults over age 25 work for a living (80% of the women and 55% of the men), and contrary to common thinking—the main problem is not the lower percentage of workers but the low income of those who do work. In that respect it is exactly like the tailor who chooses to earn little.

Yossi,
GDP per capita refers to adults, not children.