Hello Chedva, LOY"T

Thank you very much for your reply. I was hoping that your reply would help clarify at
least some of the issues that I brought up. Unfortunately, it made matters that much more
obscure.

Firstly, you indicate that your data comes from the CBS which indicates that Taub Center
did not conduct an independent survey of any kind. I am somewhat confused because the
CBS recently released figures related to employment and, based on a Jerusalem Post
report dated May 16, 2010 (http://www.jpost.com/Israel/Article.aspx?id=175700), it
indicates that 52% of haredi men in total (inside and outside of the prime age bracket of
35-54) are employed and only 48% are non-employed. This figure differs greatly from
your report that claims that 65% of Hareidi men in their prime working age are non-
employed (it is impossible to assume that the +54 or -35 age bracket is more employed
than the prime age bracket). Please clarify.

Second, you wrote that "The whole issue of how haredim are defined in our study is
explained in detail in the labor chapter of the book". I reviewed the chapter. There is
absolutely no mention on any methods of identifying working age people as haredi.
Please refer me to what I missed. It did indeed mention on pages 190-191 how students
can be classified based on the type of schools they attend. This is elementary but it has no
bearing on how working age people are defined and identified as haredi. Please clarify.

Thirdly, you wrote that the translation of "payments" was based on the graph on page 40
which was reprinted into the press release. Indeed, I missed the graph on page 40
because, since the topic was Welfare, I was looking at the segment of the report about
welfare which is on pages 261-280. I must comment that the brief discussion on poverty
on pages 38-40 makes no mention of Welfare. Even though payment is the correct
translation of tashlum, welfare is not the correct translation of ‫ העברה‬. Haavara means
"transfer" and, as such, the correct translation of the graph would need to be "Transfer
Payments". That said, the report makes no mention of what these transfer payments are
for, and who they are being made to, who is making them, and how they are broken
down. And certainly, not on what justifies them to be translated as "welfare". Please
clarify.

With all this said, and in light of the great need for claification of your findings, I am still
very insistent upon a direct interview with Professor Ben-David. If this cannot be
arranged, I will have to conclude that Professor Ben-David declines to be interviewed.

Thank you very much,

Very sincerely yours,

Yechezkel Hirshman