Category Archives: People

Khushwant Singh’s 8 Clues to Happiness should Drive USA Housing and Social Policy

July 29, 2011 – 4:18 pm

My friend Jaspreet Sihota shared with me Khushwant Singh’s 8 Clues to Happiness. Khushwant Singh is a famously happy (and old) Sikh author and I agree with him 100%. In fact, I believe these 8 principles should underly housing and social policy in America where millions of families are obese, financially unstable (and insecure about their work prospects due to globalization), and worried that a home of their own may not be a reality for future generations.

EIGHT CLUES TO HAPPINESS

By- KHUSHWANT SINGH

Having lived a reasonably contented life, I was musing over what a

person should strive for to achieve happiness. I drew up a list of a

few essentials which I put forward for the readers’ appraisal.

1. First and foremost is GOOD HEALTH. If you do not enjoy good health

you can never be happy. Any ailment, however trivial, will deduct from

your happiness.

2. Second, A HEALTHY BANK BALANCE. It need not run into millions but

should be enough to provide for creature comforts and something to

spare for recreation, like eating out, going to the pictures,

traveling or going on holidays on the hills or by the sea. Shortage of

money can be only demoralizing. Living on credit or borrowing is

demeaning and lowers one in one’s own eyes.

3. Third, A HOME OF YOUR OWN. Rented premises can never give you the

snug feeling of a nest which is yours for keeps that a home provides:

if it has a garden space, all the better. Plant your own trees and

flowers, see them grow and blossom, cultivate a sense of kinship with

them.

4. Fourth, AN UNDERSTANDING COMPANION, be it your spouse or a friend.

If there are too many misunderstandings, they will rob you of your

peace of mind.

5. Fifth, LACK OF ENVY towards those who have done better than you in

life; risen higher, made more money, or earned more fame.

Envy can be very corroding; avoid comparing yourself with others.

6. Sixth, DO NOT ALLOW OTHER PEOPLE to descend on you for gossip. By

the time you get rid of them, you will feel exhausted and poisoned by

their gossip-mongering.

7. Seventh, CULTIVATE SOME HOBBIES which can bring you a sense of

fulfillment, such as gardening, reading, writing, painting, playing or

listening to music.

8. Eighth, every morning and evening, devote 15 minutes to

INTROSPECTION. In the morning, 10minutes should be spent on stilling

the mind and then 5minutes in listing things you have to do that day.

In the evening, 5minutes to still the mind again, and 10minutes to go

over what you had undertaken to do.

RICHNESS is not

Earning More,

Spending More or

Saving More, but …

RICHNESS IS WHEN YOU NEED NO MORE

Tags happiness, healthy living, home ownership, housing policy, khushwant singh | Comment (0)

Business Life People Public Policy Real Estate

492 Days “Free Rent” For Those Choosing Foreclosure

November 30, 2010 – 2:08 am

For those of you who don’t think there’s additional downside risk in the housing market, here is a number that is a shock to almost any reasonable reader: 492.

This is a number that was reported in a Wall Street Journal blog from yesterday…and represents “the number of days since the average borrower in foreclosure last made a mortgage payment”.

I am an ardent advocate that the government and Banks can and should be doing a lot more (more efficiently than current approaches) to help distressed homeowners get educated about their realistic options, avoid foreclosure, and get a fresh start so they can move on to get jobs, stabilize themselves financially, and buy a home again…if they so desire, and if their credit behavior supports the opportunity. However, the housing crisis will not be solved and private mortgage investors will not lend again freely (as they need to in order to support overall economic growth) unless some common sense standards are set for the foreclosure process across the 50 states.

During extraordinary times such as the ones we are living in currently, I am a proponent of a 12 month maximum standard transition timeframe for borrowers with documented financial distress to transition from their properties through either a foreclosure alternative or through foreclosure. I think 12 months is enough time for a family to come to terms with their financial problems, develop a plan to get back on track, and start to implement on that plan including moving out of the home they couldn’t afford.

Here’s some more information from and a link to the relevant blog:

Number of the Week: 492 Days From Default to Foreclosure

492: The number of days since the average borrower in foreclosure last made a mortgage payment.

Banks can’t foreclose fast enough to keep up with all the people defaulting on their mortgage loans. That’s a problem, because it could make stiffing the bank even more attractive to struggling borrowers.

In recent months, the number of borrowers entering severe delinquency — meaning they missed their third monthly mortgage payment — has been on the decline, falling to about 700,000 in October, according to mortgage-data provider LPS Applied Analytics. But it’s still more than double the number of foreclosure processes started.

As a result, banks are taking progressively longer to foreclose. The average borrower in the foreclosure process hadn’t made a payment in 492 days as of the end of October, according to LPS. That compares to 382 days a year ago and a low of 244 days in August 2007. Here’s a link to the full blog: http://tinyurl.com/36ghafg

Tags borrower, distressed borrower, foreclosure, foreclosure process, foreclosure timeline, free rent | Comment (0)

Business Life People Public Policy Real Estate

HAFA Short Sales: A Much Needed “Fresh Start” Program For Troubled Borrowers

November 27, 2010 – 7:14 pm

A recently implemented foreclosure alternatives program created by federal officials is reflective of what many real estate professionals know already: for those experiencing significant loss of household income, financial stability and a job are more important than short term retention of home ownership.

The Home Affordable Foreclosure Alternatives – or HAFA program – designed by the Treasury Department and implemented by Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac, and loan servicers representing more than 90 percent of all loans outstanding offers short sale and deed-in-lieu opportunities to millions of distressed homeowners who are struggling to make their mortgage payments due to labor market issues.

Short sales are the primary foreclosure alternative offered under the HAFA program. With its mandatory implementation in the non-GSE market starting April 5, 2010 and its adoption by both Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac on August 1^st, 2010, HAFA becomes the only standardized nationwide short sale program offered by multiple loan servicers with mandated debt forgiveness by all lien holders and $3000 in relocation support to help families move to affordable housing and regain their financial footing.

Until now, debt forgiveness for qualifying families has been a critical missing ingredient in the short sale industry – affecting homeowners as well as the real estate professionals supporting them during their time of need. Loan servicers – who represent the interests of loan investors (not consumers) – have been reluctant to promise debt forgiveness when approving short sale transactions due to fear of potential lawsuits from loan investors aiming to maximize their collections on bad debt.

Now, the HAFA program has set a clear and much needed market standard – for qualifying families with unaffordable mortgages on their primary residence – debt forgiveness should be the norm. Finally, we can offer distressed borrowers a respectful exit and fresh start outside the foreclosure process.

Tags debt forgiveness, distressed borrower, foreclosure alternatives, foreclosure prevention, hafa, home affordable foreclosure alternatives, mortgage relief, short sales, treasury | Comment (0)

Business Life People Politics Public Policy Real Estate World World Affairs

Responsible 2nd Chances: Loan Modifications Addressing the Issue of Negative Equity and (Borrower) Moral Hazard

January 9, 2010 – 11:46 pm

Proactive government and bank efforts to help distressed borrowers have largely, if not exclusively, been focused on ‘home retention’ programs in 2009. On the one hand this focus makes sense: the first question that should be asked and answered when a family stops making their mortgage payment due to financial hardship is whether an change to the loan terms would make the home affordable for the same borrower (thereby avoiding all the negative effects of a pre or post foreclosure home sale) while being acceptable to the investor.

On the other hand, given constrained resources this almost exclusive focus on home retention, which has come thus far at the expense of those that could not afford to keep ownership of their home, has been a little confusing to me, a former Chief People Officer who had to layoff over 7000 people between mid-2007 and mid-2008 due to the mortgage crisis. Most of these above mentioned responsible employees of my former mortgage bank employer, unfortunately fall into the latter category of families who would not be able to afford homes they once could, and I think we have missed the boat thus far on properly providing and supporting home and life transitions for these families.

My issue with the focus of government and bank programs thus far is not that they shouldn’t focus on helping every family in trouble first try to keep their home if they want…but on the public message and conversation we are having.

America is undergoing a fundamental shift in consumer behavior and economic activity today, and as Charles Darwin said, ‘It’s not the strongest species that survive, nor the most intelligent. It’s the ones most adaptable to change’.

Americans (myself included) need to adapt to the new economy…and if this means they need to sell their home and move…so be it. (Family), jobs and financial stability are more important, in my view, than holding onto a home one cannot afford.

Notwithstanding the above gap in proactive bank and government programs till date, let’s circle back to the issue of home retention first. Early results are in on government and bank home retention efforts…and performance thus far is viewed as below expectations. Only about 20% of the families in trouble have been provided a temporary modification (mod) yet…and conversion rates of these temporary mods to permanent mods are very low thus far. 2 things should be noted before one judge’s the above too soon:

1. The number of loan modifications attempted (this is where progress starts – with a step in the right direction) is significantly larger than in the previous year/s and under the previous administration/team

2. In some ways, the problem isn’t the number of people in trial mods. While lots of effort is and will be put on solving the current problem (hopefully successfully) of converting the 75% or so performing trial mods into permanent ones (except where there was mis-statement of income, which is not kosher in my view), the real issue is improperly set expectations…and lack of enough alternate modification programs (addressing the diversity in situation among those in trouble right now).

A key flaw in most loan modifications offered today including HAMP is highlighted by the article I am including below on a recent by the New York Federal Reserve Bank: they do not address the issue of negative equity.

Since 25% of US homeowners have negative equity today, and since our national goal is to do more to help those in trouble who want to retain their home, I thought I’d resurface a simple loan modification proposal I first introduced in an April 2009 blog….which I believe could significantly expand the success of our home retention efforts.

Responsible Second Chances: A break today in exchange for some of tomorrow’s upside

For every American family who is unable to afford the payment on their primary residence, I would offer them a one page loan modification with the following terms:

1.    Reduction in loan principal down to current market value.
2.    30 year fixed mortgage at current historically low market rates.
3.    25% of any equity appreciation from the written down loan principal (the remaining 75% would go back to the investor taking the loss on the principal write-down today)…thereby reducing the bite of the loss of principal taken today.

4. Requirement that if the borrower misses more than 3 mortgage payments again and is unable to reinstate their loan, they would voluntarily exit the property within 6 months of falling behind…either via a Short Sale or Voluntary Foreclosure.

Why do I think the program above would help many not being helped today? Here’s why:

1.    It addresses the issue of negative equity…which is critical, per the article and study mentioned below
2.    It is ‘economically’ the right answer (in effect, any family that can afford their home today at current values and mortgage rates, gets to keep it)
3.    It addresses the issue of moral hazard: there’s no free lunch in America (at least not for long). The family gives up 75% future equity appreciation in exchange for the investor taking a significant loss on the loan today (via the principal write-down). This should largely eliminate, in my view, the need to collect financial hardship documentation…which is a key reason many mods are not becoming permanent today.
4.    It is simple to understand, unlike the HAMP program…which does not result in a principal reduction, as many borrowers applying for HAMP mistakenly believe it does.

5. It addresses the issue of what happens if the loan goes bad again…which is important for the investor who is making a big compromise today.

Implementability

It is likely my proposal is not implementable in many parts of the private market…particularly the securitized loan market. However, it could be implemented for government sponsored and owned enterprises…Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac and FHA…which represent a large part of the market.

Article from DSNews.com: Fed Study Finds Principal Writedowns Minimize Risk of Redefault

Servicers who lower distressed homeowners’ mortgage payments by reducing the principal balance, as opposed to just making interest rate adjustments, are much more likely to see the payments keep coming in and ward off a redefault, according to a new study published by the Federal Reserve Bank of New York.

The economists found a definite pattern among modifications made since December 2005 that suggests “an intention among servicers to make the loans more affordable, while not losing any of the underlying principle.” However, their analysis shows that modifications that trim off some of the loan balance have higher rates of success and “can double the reduction in re-default rates.”

While principal writedowns essentially mean the lender or investor must eat a loss, many analysts argue that it’s a smaller loss than comes with the eventual foreclosure and the price tag of a nonperforming asset in today’s housing market, already swollen with REO inventories and vacant properties.

According to the New York Fed’s economists, when a borrower’s monthly mortgage payment is cut by 25 percent by reducing the interest rate only, the borrower is 11 percent less likely to default within one year.
But, if the monthly payment is lowered by the same 25 percent, this time by shaving 25 percent off of the outstanding loan balance, coupled with a small interest rate cut, the chances that the borrower will defaulting again within one year drops by nearly 27 percent.

The report’s authors also concluded that borrowers who have a loan-to-value (LTV) ratio of 115 percent or higher – meaning they owe 15 percent or more than their homes are worth – pose a 51 percent higher risk of redefaulting after a modification.

According to a blog by Wall Street Journal reporter Nick Timiraos, the findings of the New York Fed paper could have big implications on the administration’s Home Affordable Modification Program (HAMP). Timiraos explained that while the program doesn’t preclude principal forgiveness on the part of lenders, HAMP’s primary push is on lowering interest rates and extending the loan term to bring monthly payments down – exactly the types of modifications that the Fed report says have a higher chance of becoming delinquent again.

The Congressional Oversight Panel and the special inspector general for the Troubled Asset Relief Program (TARP) have criticized the government’s mortgage modification efforts on numerous occasions for not addressing the issue of negative equity, which would ultimately involve trimming LTV ratios by shaving off outstanding mortgage balances.

A growing number of mortgage experts and foreclosure counselors agree with the federal watchdogs and the New York Fed economists that principal reduction is a powerful incentive for borrowers to keep up with their restructured payments, particularly now, when such a large number of mortgages are underwater.
First American CoreLogic says that nearly 10.7 million, or 23 percent, of the residential mortgages in the United States had negative equity at the end of the third quarter of 2009, with the homeowner owing more on the home than it was worth.

A modification is only worthwhile if it induces borrowers who would otherwise default to continue paying, the New York Fed’s economists noted, and they argue in their analysis that borrowers with positive equity in their properties have a strong incentive to keep current on their mortgage, since delinquency and foreclosure will ultimately lead to a loss of the asset.

“In fact,” they wrote, “borrowers with positive equity (that is, borrowers whose house is worth more than the balance on their mortgage) should rarely default, since refinancing the mortgage or selling the property are better options than foreclosure, which may cause the borrower to lose [their] equity.”

Tags foreclosure prevention, HAMP, home retention, loan modification, Making Home Affordable, negative equity, principal writedowns | Comment (0)

Business Los angeles People Public Policy Real Estate World World Affairs

Who should get to keep their home and who shouldn’t? Simplicity is key for success

April 23, 2009 – 1:54 am

There are a lot of people who have gotten “unlucky” recently, in one way or another, and are finding themselves unable to make payments on their debt because their income and expense equation is no longer what it used to be (i.e., their income is down, or their expenses are up). Of the millions of homeowners currently not making their full monthly mortgage payments, it’s hard to tell which ones were unlucky, who got defrauded or lied to, and who just plain made a stupid (intentional or unintentional) mistake and bought something they couldn’t really afford.

So who – of the large number of people that aren’t able to make their currently monthly housing payments – should get to keep their home and who shouldn’t? This is more than a million dollar question and we’re having a helluva time as a nation trying to answer this question, in policy and in practice, fairly, systematically and timely.

There are currently a myriad home retention programs implemented across dozens of servicers nationwide, and if I had to pick one word to describe the current landscape of options made available to troubled borrowers, I would pick “complicated”.

I think if we could come up with a simple common sense rule of thumb to answer this key question, we would be much further ahead in stabilizing our housing market. So in the spirit of proposing solutions instead of criticizing current approaches, here’s my simple solution to this problem:

If you can afford the home you currently live in at its current market price with loan terms based on current (historically low) market housing rates….you should get to keep it. If you can’t, you should move on and find rental housing that you can afford based on your current financial reality.

How would I achieve the above if I were designing our national housing programs? I’d keep it pretty simple (although I acknowledge that making it so would be rather complicated and time consuming…with no guarantee of success):

1. Do principle write-downs to current market value for all troubled borrowers who can afford their home on current market terms…but in return for this (massive) accommodation…require them to give up 75% of future home equity appreciation back to the investors who took the loss resulting from the initial principal write-down…until the investors are made whole. After that point, allow the homeowner to keep any remaining equity upside.

2. Allow every other owner occupied troubled borrower to sell their property via a servicer offered short sale accompanied by a cash payment to help the family move to affordable rental housing. Forgive the “deficiency” for these borrowers including any tax that might be owed on the amount forgiven (most families in trouble can’t afford a hefty tax payment anyways, so this would only push them further into the hole)

3. Allow every other non-owner occupied borrower to sell their property via a servicer offered short sale, but with no cash payment and no automatic forgiveness of deficiency

Would we likely require a new governmental entity/group to track the details on the principal write-downs and resulting future home equity appreciation share on behalf of impacted investors? Yes.

Is this simple proposal difficult to gain agreement on? Yes…very difficult. But no more difficult than it will be to deal with the millions of avoidable foreclosures that we will experience otherwise.

Tags foreclosure crisis, foreclosure prevention policies, housing crisis, short sales, systematic short sales, US housing market | Comment (1)

Business Life Los angeles People Public Policy Real Estate

Why it Never Makes Business Sense For a Bank to Foreclose on an Owner Occupied Home

February 26, 2009 – 4:47 pm

I believe that in the current housing and economic environment (with declining home values nationwide) it never makes economic sense for a Bank/Servicer to foreclosure on an owner occupied home. In a declining home price environment, a foreclosure is always the least attractive option for a Bank economically, as the time and cost of foreclosure result in lower economic returns compared to other pre-foreclosure options. As a result, I believe we can successfully and rightfully place a temporary nationwide foreclosure moratorium on homes occupied by cooperative owners/borrowers – if we design such a moratorium right and support it with appropriate private sector initiatives.

A foreclosure should only be necessary if and when the borrower (individual or family) doesn’t return the Bank’s phone calls or respond to the Bank’s letters and is otherwise uncooperative on the issue of how to address their housing costs and reality in a way that is sustainable for them and the Bank longer term. This in my mind is a key concept: the goal of all foreclosure prevention initiatives should be to adapt the borrowers economic reality with their housing reality.

In simple terms, here’s how we can avoid foreclosures in a way that is consistent with good business and good policy:

1. Loan modifications to make housing costs affordable: Maximize the number of borrowers whose loan is modified such that their housing costs are consistent, on a go forward term basis, with their go forward monthly income. The Obama administration has announced several initiatives to expand current loan modification programs to help achieve this goal.

However, loan modification cannot work for everyone. If an individual’s earnings are down a lot with no immediate prospect of returning to previous higher levels (which is the case for many people in the housing, real estate and mortgage sectors)…then they really cannot afford to stay where they currently are. For example, if a realtor previously earned $500,000 per year and is living in a $3 million dollar home but is now only making $100,000 per year then loan modification just isn’t an option for them. A different solution is required.

2. Servicer assisted short sales: For every individual who does not qualify for a loan modification, a servicer assisted short sale should be pursued right at the point the loan modification decision is made. In a servicer assisted short sale, the (troubled) borrower works with the servicer as a partner instead of adversary. The home is sold for market value, the difference between the amount of the home sale proceeds and the loan amount is forgiven (and current law waives any tax liability associated with this forgiven amount), and the servicer can even afford to pay the borrower to help make their move to more affordable housing smooth, graceful and respectful.

This type of short sale program is and should be the industry standard – and I and HausAngeles are enthusiastically working with a leading servicer to pilot and refine this program in Los Angeles (so it can quickly be rolled out nationwide).

The above foreclosure prevention strategy – implemented in a coordinated and well communicated manner – can effectively eliminate foreclosures for all cooperative troubled borrowers while actually reducing servicer/Bank losses on these troubled assets.

Can doing the right thing be good business? On the issue of owner occupied foreclosures I believe the answer is yes – as long as all parties are polite, respectful and realistic.

Disclaimer: This blog is not intended to provide legal or tax advice to anyone and merely reflects my personal understanding and opinions on this issue. Individuals should consult with their tax advisor before taking any action based on the above.

Tags foreclosure moratorium, lender assisted short sales, loan modifications, los angeles foreclosures, los angeles short sales, loss mitigation programs, loss mitigation strategies, preventing foreclosures, servicer assisted short sales, short sales | Comment (0)

Business Life Los angeles People Real Estate spirituality

The Silver Lining of The Crisis: Affordability and Humility

February 23, 2009 – 7:42 pm

It’s hard to find much good news nowadays, surrounded as we are by doom and gloom attitudes and news at work, in the media and in conversations. However, I see at least 2 important areas where the current trend is positive for us as a society: Housing Affordability and Humility.

First, as a result of the housing crisis and the tremendous (and at least for now, continuing) declines in the prices of residential real estate, home or condo ownership is suddenly becoming a viable possibility for many lower income families. As an example, please check out the press release below from the California Association of Realtors (a trade organization) which discusses the massive improvements in housing affordability in California over the past 12 months. The analysis below is grounded in Q4 08 vs. Q4 07 data and will continue to “improve” (from a lower income family standpoint) in the coming months. This information is a far cry from conversations I remember just a few years ago regarding how housing had become a “luxury product” in California. Given the tremendous and well acknowledged familial and social benefits of home ownership, this significant improvement in housing affordability is great news for California and for Los Angeles.

Second, one of my least favorite aspects of the boom days was the massive inflation of ego’s all around me. Many people made much easy money during the boom, and in too many cases this financial success was accompanied by an increased sense of relative self-importance (for reasons discussed by both Nassim Nicholas Taleb and Malcolm Gladwell in recent books). The current crisis is quickly downsizing people’s ego’s and I, for one, think a humbler, gentler us will be a better us as a whole.

Entry-level housing affordability increases to 59 percent
Click here for the full article: Full Article

Wednesday, Feb. 18, 2009

C.A.R. reports entry-level housing affordability increases to 59 percent

LOS ANGELES (Feb. 18) The percentage of households that could afford to buy an entry-level home in California stood at 59 percent in the fourth quarter of 2008, compared with 33 percent for the same period a year ago, according to a report released today by the CALIFORNIA ASSOCIATION OF REALTORS® (C.A.R.).

C.A.R.’s First Time Buyer Housing Affordability Index (FTB-HAI) measures the percentage of households that can afford to purchase an entry-level home in California. C.A.R. also reports first-time buyer indexes for regions and select counties within the state. The Index is the most fundamental measure of housing well-being for first-time buyers in the state.

The minimum household income needed to purchase an entry-level home at $248,030 in California in the fourth quarter of 2008 was $48,900, based on an adjustable interest rate of 6.02 percent and assuming a 10 percent down payment. First-time buyers typically purchase a home equal to 85 percent of the prevailing median price. The monthly payment including taxes and insurance was $1,630 for the fourth quarter of 2008.

At $48,900, the minimum qualifying income was 42 percent lower than a year earlier when households needed $83,700 to qualify for a loan on an entry-level home. Recent decreases in home prices and mortgage rates have brought affordability into better alignment with income levels of the typical California households, where the median household income is $59,160.

At 76 percent, the High Desert region was the most affordable area in the state. The San Luis Obispo County region was the least affordable in the state at 44 percent, followed by the Los Angeles County region at 46 percent.

The First-Time Buyer Housing Affordability Index also rose 6 percentage points in the fourth quarter of this year compared with the third quarter of 2008, due to a 14.1 percent decrease in the entry-level median home price.

Historical affordability data can be found at: historic data.

Tags affordable housing, CAR, economic crisis, ego, housing affordability, housing crisis, humility, silver lining in crisis, silver lining in economic crisis | Comment (0)

Business Education Life People

Announcing the creation of “HR Helping Hands”: An All Volunteer HR Professionals Mentor Network

February 19, 2009 – 10:07 pm

Every American can and should be a part of the solution to the historic housing and economic crisis our country and people are currently grappling with. This is my strong personal view as well as a key founding principle behind my real estate company HausAngeles, and is a view that is shared by most everyone around me both at work and at home. The truth is that until America is back on its feet and stronger economically, there will be millions of Americans (possibly up to 5 or 10% of our population) who need different types of help….but this number will be far smaller than the number of Americans (likely 90 to 95% of our population) who are in a position to help…in some way, big or small, monetary or non-monetary. So if we can help connect those with the ability and willingness to help with those that need this help….we can accelerate the path to economic recovery in a manner that isn’t dependent on the government “bailing everyone out”.

It is with this spirit that I have founded “Human Resources (HR) Helping Hands”: an all volunteer, free network of professionals with HR experience who want to donate their time and talents to help fellow Americans (e.g., those that have lost a job recently) in need of advice and support with respect to their job and career transitions.

As a former Chief People Officer for a 10,000+ employee organization, I have worked with many Human Resources professionals and know that “HR people” are helpers and empathizers by nature. Many HR professionals really want to help those impacted by this crisis, particularly given the large number of people experiencing job loss right now, but don’t have an easy way to get connected with these individuals in need. Enabling this “connection” is what HR Helping Hands is all about.

In the few days since I made the decision to create this network, I am already inspired by the enthusiasm and response from my HR colleagues and friends. Susan Cline, my former (fabulous) assistant at Indymac Bank, has agreed to be the “administrator” of this network…purely in her “free time” (i.e., during the evenings after she comes home from work). Key current and former Indymac HR leaders – Annissa Deshpande, Jennifer Pikoos and Marie Therese Wynne – have also joined the network, as well as agreed to be part of the core team that helps to build and manage this network (again, all in their personal time).

The network is “live” so if you are an HR professional (or know one) who would like to join and help, please email Susan at susanmc50@gmail.com. Alternatively, if you have a friend or acquaintance who could use an HR mentor…connect them with Susan to help them get an HR professional mentor assigned.

In order to keep the process simple (since this is an all-volunteer initiative), we are asking the HR professionals for the following minimum support for each mentee: an email or phone resume consultation/feedback session, and a 30m or more job and career advice session. Mentors can decide to do more and mentee’s can ask for more help…but we will leave this up to them to discuss and resolve.

I will keep you blog updated as this initiative progresses….and hope you will share this with anyone you think might be either a potential mentor or mentee. ray

Tags citizens helping citizens, hausangeles, helping laid off people, helping others, hr helping hands, HR professional, HR professional mentor, HR professional support, human resources, job dislocation | Comment (0)

Life People Politics spirituality

Reconsidering my decision to tune into the Inauguration

January 18, 2009 – 12:50 am

The US Presidential Inauguration is this coming Tuesday…and it couldn’t come soon enough. It is clear that the problems facing the US and the world at large are very serious and we need vigorious action oriented leadership with the public’s confidence at the helm in this country ASAP.

So as we approach the Inauguration, and in light of President Elect Obama having invited gay bishop Gene Robinson to lead prayers at Sunday celebrations leading upto the Inauguration, I’m reconsidering my stand on whether I’m tuning into this historic occasion.

I still believe the selection of Rick Warren for the invocation at the inauguration was a poor one, in light of the major recent loss the LGBT community has suffered in California with the passage of Proposition 8 (and generally during the last 8 years with similar constitutional amendments having been passed in 30 states). But I am also practical enough to realize 2 things:

1.The LBGT community is hardly likely to part with the Democrats in favor of the Republican party anyone soon given the continuing strong influence of social conservatives over the Republican agenda and party. The Obama team clearly understood this and so from their standpoint and given their objectives, selecting Warren was likely seen as a relatively risk free method of bringing more political support to the table.
2.The country and the world has more pressing issues to be addressed right now, and we have to prioritize and pick our battles. In fact, the country (and President Elect Obama) need every capable individual on the ground pulling their weight and trying to drive the country forward in the right direction

So I decided I do want to participate in history….and am now planning to tune in.

I think all of us need to give our new President a chance to make an impact before judging him. In fact, some judgment errors are to be expected as the team moves forward and makes decisions. I would even go as far as to say if we don’t see some (hopefully small) mistakes, it is a signal that our President and his team are not making decisions quickly enough.

Tags gene robinson, lgbt community reaction to warren selection, presidential inauguration, tuesday's inauguration | Comment (0)

Business Life Los angeles People Public Policy Real Estate World World Affairs

A Roof Over Every American’s Head: Addressing the Core of our Current Crisis of Confidence

January 12, 2009 – 4:50 pm

What is the #1 worry that most Americans have when they get laid off? I believe it is that they might lose the roof over their and their families’ heads in a worst case scenario (i.e., if they are unable to find adequate alternate sources of income).

Now imagine if the government of this country was able to promise all of its lawful citizens this: “No matter what, you and your family will always have a roof over your head. We know we are in the middle of the greatest economic downturn since the 1930’s and we also know that there has been overbuilding in the housing sector. We have put these two realities together to make a unique promise to all Americans today so that you may feel secure and confident about their family’s safety.”

Do you think the above promise would help the nation stabilize (and possibly even start an economic recovery)? I believe it might because it addresses the very heart of the problem in America today: a lack of confidence in our future and a deep worry (almost and actually a panic in many people) about what this future will bring.

Now, I am not one who believes that every American can and should own a home (even though I do strongly believe in the societal and familial benefits of home ownership). Nor do I believe that we should subsidize home ownership for current home owners any more than we would subsidize it for new homeowners. But we do have plenty of housing available in America today….and the government can and should do more to help those Americans who suddenly find themselves in an economically precarious situation.

The US government already provides rent subsidy at varying levels to the lowest income in our society…primarily through the Section 8 and public housing programs (Disclosure: I am on the Board of the Los Angeles Public Housing Authority, which owns/administers both programs in Los Angeles). So why not expand this concept to stabilize our families in a manner that is sensible, fair and proactive? This might just be the type of bold action we need given the times we are experiencing currently.

Tags crisis of confidence, economic crisis, economic recovery, foreclosures, housing crisis | Comment (1)

Business Life People Public Policy Real Estate

Untapped and Under-tapped Foreclosure Prevention Strategies: “Let a Hundred Flowers Bloom”

December 16, 2008 – 8:39 pm

There is widespread agreement among key national political, economic and housing stakeholders (the government and regulators, consumers and Banks among others) on the need to help prevent foreclosures, keep as many people as possible in their homes, and “clear the housing market” of troubled assets quickly and fairly. This would help the housing market find a bottom more quickly – which housing market bottom will mark a turning point in our nations’ economic recovery.

In the spirit of Barney Frank’s statement “Let a Hundred Flowers Bloom”, I have put together this foreclosure prevention vision (including feedback and insight from Ron Garber, CEO of Short Sale Plan and Eric Friedman, SVP of Loss MItigation at Indymac Bank).

The housing market and economy are facing problems larger than any individual or organization….and it is in this spirit that I am publicly sharing this vision. I would welcome feedback from anyone who has experience in foreclosure prevention and any of the related strategies/areas.

I will be pursuing some or all of these strategies for Los Angeles and perhaps nationally in my capacity as CEO of HausAngeles, and in partnership with Ron Garber, who has spent the last 2 years developing and refining systematic short sales knowledge, education/training, processes/documentation and infrastructure….believing that they are the preferred alternative to foreclosures for all parties involved.

Tags foreclosure prevention, foreclosures, housing crisis, housing market bottom, rent to own, short sales | Comment (0)

Life People Politics Public Policy World World Affairs

Redefining the War on Terror

November 28, 2008 – 10:33 pm

The Mumbai “terrorist” attacks are a clear message to President Elect Obama, us, and the rest of the world. The problems of the world aren’t just economic….they are equally urgent, social and extend deeply into our homes and places of worship.

The Bombay attacks are highly symbolic in their location/s, organization-level and timing. And they hit home. I definitely feel the significance of these particular attacks personally. The violence was directed at the heart of India’s financial system where my (our) friends hang out, my (our) colleagues stay when they visit India, and our companies establish offices when they enter the Indian market (the 5 star hotels Taj and Oberoi in Bombay have been the India office for many a blue chip multi-national corporation). The targeting of westerners by the attackers is particularly galling since it targets a big source of support and growth for India and it’s democracy, philosophies and people. India is getting more integrated with the west and the global economy, and the attacks sought to strike at the core locations and symbols of this progress.

So what? Since change is in the air, here’s the 2 key changes I’d like to see made immediately in our”war on terror”:

1. Rename it in a way that reflects what it is. In some ways I think we have glorified what is really going on, by allowing this global problem to be named a “War on Terror” fought against Terrorists. Certainly the acts can and do bring terror into people’s hearts. But why not (at least) try to take away this terrible power? There is clearly no moral equality in this war, and the battleground is people’s minds and hearts (not a physical battlefield). The truth is these so called terrorists are generally pathetic (and often unlucky) losers perpetrating violence in the name of God. Calling their movement what it is will go a long way towards accelerating it’s end, in my view…and also helping make it less and ultimately non-violent.

2. Acknowledge that this is not only about Islam and is truly global/multi-national. Violent Islamic fundamentalists are certainly creating massive problems worldwide, but the problems extend beyond Islam. In my (our) lifetime the forces of religious fundamentalism have risen dramatically across the globe in reaction to the forces of globalization, westernization and modernity….and many outside Islam are also perpetrating violence in the name of their God. Broadening the focus beyond Islam will, I think, help address it more quickly in Islam also…as it will remove the ego and pride barrier created by the perceptions of denouncing an entire (and majorly important and large) religion.

Tags india and pakistan, islam, mumbai attacks, terrorists, war on terror | Comment (0)

Life People

The math in relationships

November 5, 2006 – 10:51 pm

Is there a math in relationships? Does there need to be an equal exchange of value (financial, emotional, social, spiritual….real or perceived) for any relationship to work long term? I don’t know. I think there’s more math involved than most let on. Although I don’t think the math is simple (or can be simiplified)…as humans are complex and so are those things that we care about.

I also think some relationships are ‘sacred’ (at least where I come from)…so the intangible value keeps those relationships always stable, real, and in equilibrium. Love to hear what others think….

Tags Life, living, People, relationships | Comment (0)

Education Life People Politics Public Policy World World Affairs

How the middle east will be liberated

May 13, 2006 – 10:53 pm

Ultimately, I believe true ‘liberation’ and ‘freedom’ for the oppressed in the middle east (those that are denied opportunity and freedom….particularly youth, women and children) will have to be achieved by the people in the middle east for themselves.

Perhaps I am biased, being Indian (given our history of achieving freedom from the British through struggle). This freedom will be achieved on the ground over time with education, knowledge and a taste for how it feels to be able to determine one’s own future. Check out this great article from last week’s Wall Street Journal. To me, the media is the most important tool in helping bring information to people….so their own minds and hearts are changed. We should be spending billions on this….not mere millions. Look what TV, knowledge/information and opportunity have done for post-liberation India!!
Lastly, to clarify, I am talking about true internal change….not just a change in the broad, high level framework of government (which the US has facilitated in places like Iraq). The high level framework too is important…but not nearly enough in an of itself.Liberty TV

By KENNETH Y. TOMLINSON
May 6, 2006; Page A8

In recent weeks, we’ve heard a great deal in Washington about how we ought to be broadcasting to Iran. But it might be instructive to examine what U.S. international broadcasting is already doing.

Very recently, on a Persian-language satellite television broadcast from the United States, the people of Iran learned that Iran’s oldest and largest student organization, Tahkim Vahdat, urged the government to suspend uranium enrichment and to cooperate with the international community by restricting nuclear development to peaceful uses. The group called the government’s behavior “irrational and confrontational.” Needless to say none of this appeared in Iran’s government-controlled media; few rulers on earth exercise the degree of censorship enforced by the Iranian government.

Another program featured the story of Hossein Derakhshan, once jailed in Iran for starting an Internet blog. Upon his release, he managed to get to Canada where he now runs the most popular blog — in Iran.

Or consider this exchange that occurred on our nightly Persian-language news and current affairs program on the Voice of America.

Moderator, Ms. Setareh Derakshesh: “Our guests today are Mr. Bijan Kian, a businessman associated with the American Council on Foreign Relations, and Dr. Abbas Maleki of Sharif University in Tehran, who is currently a Harvard Research Fellow in the United States. Dr. Maleki, how do you see the possibility of direct negotiations between Washington and Tehran on Iran’s nuclear policies?”

Dr. Maleki: “From the beginning, direct talks have been part of Iran’s agenda. From Iran’s point of view, the nuclear issue is not a real problem. This is part of the overall process of development which is going on in all parts of our society, like nanotechnology, biotechnology, IT and so on . . .”

Mr. Kian: “It is amazing to hear about such claims as progress in nanotechnology in a country where there is widespread unemployment, poverty, drug addiction, prostitution, so many women’s issues and, finally, political repression and coercion. The real dispute is not between our two countries. It is between the Iranian people and the government of the Islamic Republic . . .”

Dr. Maleki: “Well! Using polemic language and slogans talking about political coercion is very easy. Even in the U.S., that technologically speaking is the most advanced country in the world, you still have poverty everywhere, unemployment and so on. Tehran is so much cleaner than New York. You can go and check the trash-ridden streets of New York. Go and have a look at poor people there. . . . Just look at the war in Iraq and Afghanistan and now this atmosphere of war the U.S. government is creating about Iran . . .”

Ms. Derakshesh: “Dr. Maleki: The majority of the people in Iran live under the poverty line — and Iran’s prisons are filled with political prisoners . . .”

Dr. Maleki: “Excuse me! You are the moderator yet you are passing a wild judgment.”

Ms. Derakshesh: “This is not my personal opinion, sir . . .”

Dr. Maleki: “Whose facts are these, where did you get them — that there are political prisoners in Iran?”

Ms. Derakshesh: “These are facts reported by credible international human rights organizations.”

Mr. Kian: “Whenever we talk about what is really going on in Iran, what we say will be branded as slogans by supporters by the regime. I have to emphasize that the American government is not in favor of war with Iran. Just look at what has been said by President Bush and his secretary of state.”

* * *
In VOA and Radio Free Europe/Radio Liberty, the U.S. has a model illustrating how broadcasting news and information (i.e., the truth) can lead to the liberation of a people.

That certainly occurred in the former Soviet Union and Eastern Europe. Recognizing that fact, the U.S. Broadcasting Board of Governors moved to increase television and radio to Iran long before the current crisis in that country. In early 2003 we launched Farda, a round-the-clock, youth-oriented radio service to Iran. A few months later we began broadcasting daily Persian news and current affairs satellite television.

The television launch may have been modest — $1.9 million for 30 minutes daily with repeats. But we have come to recognize that satellite television is to the future what shortwave radio was to the past.

That daily program today is an hour (with repeats), and by September, thanks to better than $9 million from the Bush administration and Congress, we will be broadcasting four original television hours — with news, debates and call-in shows — daily. Funds in a supplemental now before Congress could increase these broadcasts even more — and strengthen our coverage.

Small satellite dishes are proliferating in Iran and there are strong indications that VOA’s nightly programming is becoming a staple for large numbers of Iranians. Telephone polling (which tends to undercount audiences living under repressive regimes) show that better than one-in-five adult television viewers say they regularly watch VOA’s satellite television programs.

As was the case with RFE/RL and VOA in the Cold War, it is important that our broadcasts are provocative — and credible. Intense journalistic supervision is critical to achieving this goal. Truth does not lie half way between the views of Washington and Tehran. But talk and debate programs give Iranians a taste of freedom — and enlightenment.

Ultimately, the future of Iran rests with the people of Iran. Just as in the Cold War when the people ultimately prevailed over their oppressors, it will be the people of Iran who will deliver their country from the tyrants who rule them now. To paraphrase Winston Churchill, we can give them the tools — information the mullahs don’t want them to hear and debate challenging the lies of mullah-sympathizers — and the people of Iran can finish the job.

Mr. Tomlinson is chairman of the Broadcasting Board of Governors, which oversees U.S. international broadcasting.

Tags culture, freedom, media, middle east, Politics, Public Policy, World Affairs | Comment (0)

Business Life People World Affairs

Money Buys Happiness?

December 10, 2005 – 10:57 pm

The role of money in creating or facilitating happiness is a subject of great interest to me. I find every individual has their own unique relationship with money. Here are some fascinating excerpts from a recent Wall Street Journal article on this topic:

“During the holidays, we will give thanks for the important things in our lives. For most people, money is not one of these things — at least this is what we would like others to think. We are after all constantly reminding each other that “money doesn’t buy happiness.” Economists aren’t so sure.

They note that people with a lot of money tend to express a higher subjective happiness than people with very little. According data from surveys by the National Opinion Research Center, for example, people in the top fifth of income earners are about 50% more likely to say they are “very happy” than people in the bottom fifth, and only about half as likely to say they are “not too happy.”

There is, however, generally very little change in the average level of happiness in populations getting richer over the years. For instance, the percentage of the U.S. population saying it was “very happy” in 1972 was exactly the same as it was in 2002: 30.3%. Social critics of “consumerism” explain this by claiming that what makes rich people happy is not money per se, but rather the fact that they have more of it than others — so if everybody gets richer, happiness remains unchanged.

…beyond earning, taxing and spending, there is an even clearer link between money and happiness: charity. The evidence is unambiguous that donating money (and time) is one of the best ways to buy happiness. People who donate to charity are 40% more likely to say they are “very happy” than non-donors. Psychologists have even tested whether charity makes people happy using randomized, controlled experiments — the same procedure used for testing pharmaceuticals, except that, instead of administering a drug to one group and a placebo to the other, researchers randomly assign one group to act charitably toward another. The results are clear: Givers of charity earn substantial mental and physical health rewards, even more than do the recipients of charity — empirical evidence that it is indeed more blessed to give than to receive.

The bottom line is that the old axiom about money and happiness, properly understood, is quite wrong.”

(Mr. Brooks (the author) is an associate professor at Syracuse University’s Maxwell School of Public Affairs)

So what do I think? When I was younger, I focused more on the negatives of money….and tended to notice when rich people were also unhappy. Over the years, after many courses on economics taught by compelling ‘free marketers’, after seeing the enormous positive impact economic liberalization has had on the India I am familiar with, and after getting practical experience making and spending it – I’ve come to view money as a powerful facilitator and enabler…and financial independence as a critical positive step in everyone’s life.

I’m getting ready to write some checks for my favorite charities before year end. It’s that time of year. Act now to get that tax break in the 2005 tax year….it can only help the way you feel.

Tags culture, happiness, money, personal finance | Comment (0)

Business Life People Politics Public Policy Real Estate World World Affairs

If you don’t know it, you can’t fix it? Unsexy but critical: Data/Metrics

November 15, 2005 – 10:58 pm

I was reading an article about the french riots and the core liberal philosophy underlying french society and government. The french believe (rightly) that all people are equal and that race, color, ethnicity shouldn’t matter. As a result, they don’t measure any of their social outcomes by race, color or ethnicity.

No data on whether there are particular ethnic or racial segments of society that are having major problems? No way to fix these problems. If you’ve read the papers at all in the last few weeks, you know what I’m talking about.

Not sexy, but true (to me anyways). You achieve what you articulate and focus on. You fix problems you see. You improve metrics you measure and report regularly.

So why the hell is this the subject of a blog? Well, I’m not sure this is going to be a crowd-puller, but I was reading an article my boss sent me from the Wall Street Journal and I’m feeling validated (enough to share anyways!). The article is about Michael Walker, founder of the Fraser institute in Canada. A few snippets from the article which I totally agree with:

“A debate about government policy isn’t likely to be settled around values. But when there is objective measurement, resolution emerges”

“The dirty little secret of Canada’s single payer health system: that care is rationed through time rather than price”

“I firmly believe that you become what you think about, and that is as true for countries as it is for individuals”

Tags Business, data management, economics, measurement, Public Policy | Comment (0)

Life People Politics Public Policy World World Affairs

Fitting yourself into a neat box: The problem with bundling opinions

September 21, 2005 – 11:03 pm

Some on this blog have complained about the use of labels to denote ‘bundles of opinions’. Liberal. Conservative. Democrat. Republican. Gay. Straight. Pro or Anti-Hindu. These complaints struck a cord with some of the feelings I have on this issue. Why do we need someone else…a political party, a social group etc to tell us which opinions and views ‘belong together’?

I have a practical answer to this question: most people don’t have or want to take the time to think through how they really feel about each issue that is important to our society, particularly if their own life is ‘OK’ in that particular area. So, they align broadly with a group or party…and vote based on this broad choice, thinking most of the time they will vote ‘right’ (i.e., consistent with a more thought through personal choice on any particular topic).

This practical consideration, however, doesn’t make me feel better about the choices available, as I believe they significantly (and potentially adversely) impact legislation ‘on the margin’ (i.e., active legislation today).

A few examples:

1. Why does a pro-free trade stance belong with an anti-gay rights stance? Trade doesn’t have much to do with religion.
2. Why can’t you be pro-teacher and pro meritocracy and pay-for-performance in education (charter schools in America)?
3. Why can’t you be pro-Hindu (one of the greatest, and most flexible religions in the world!) without being anti-Muslim?
4. Why can’t you be pro-business and pro-gay rights or pro-choice? Who do you vote for if this is the case?

I think it’s time we started voting for issues, not parties!!

Tags parties, partisanship, Politics, public affairs, voting | Comment (0)

Business Education Life People Politics World

Actions are all that matter

September 1, 2005 – 11:04 pm

Almost everything I, and we, do at work or in life revolves around people and our relationships with them. I am fascinated by what makes relationships meaningful and what makes some people more successful than others in life. I have come to the conclusion that separating people’s actions from their words is the key to answering some of these questions. In fact, I believe actions are all that matter!

Having said that, I’ll caveat my statement by acknowledging the importance of communication, and education in our lives and for society. But at the end of the day, I’ve found that the only way to ‘cut through the crap’ and get to the heart of what’s right and valuable is to look at actions not words.

How many of you know people who claim to be bleeding heart liberals and who are vehemently anti-globalization? I know a few, who immigrated to America and stay here. How many of these folks have moved back to India (if that’s their home country) and stopped working their high paying corporate jobs? None.

How many people do you know who go to the temple everyday and discuss the importance of religion in their lives and decision making? I know a few. Many of these folks drive lavish cars and have a lot of money but would pass by a hungry homeless person without offering them a bite to eat. Also, most don’t engage in any significant charitable activity.

How many people do you know who are against allowing legal rights for same sex couples in multi-year relationships (as they believe this is anti-family) but are divorced or engaged in extra marital affairs themselves? I know many…and know there are even more I don’t know..most of whom voted for Mr Bush.

Tags culture, human behavior, relationships, spirituality | Comment (0)

Life People Politics Public Policy World World Affairs

Value of life

August 16, 2005 – 11:07 pm

The ‘value of a life’ is a recurring topic of conversation in our home. It has always confounded (and impressed) me how much americans value a single american life. I’m told a whole bunch of marines will go in and risk their life to try and save just one of their brethren during war.

I find this most fascinating, being part of a generation of Indians who grew up reading almost daily about dozens if not hundreds of deaths in Sri Lanka (the LTTE problem), Andhra Pradesh (the Naxalites), Punjab (the terrorism/secession problem there in the late ’80s and into the ’90s), Kashmir (you all know this one, I’m sure), Assam..and the list goes on (and this doesn’t even include violence outside of India!!).

There was nary a day when one didn’t hear of a ‘brown bag’ exploding and killing all the people on a bus…or some story similar to that. Most of us got used to this over the years, and became relatively immune to the violence and death.

I’ll blog some other time about my hypotheses on what drives this dramatic difference in how a human life is viewed in different parts of the world.

Today I’m wondering and thinking of how one values a dogs life?

Yesterday, our beloved Great Dane Lara got ‘bloat’ – a relatively common but life-threatening condition that large breed dogs (particularly deep chested ones) are prone to. Here, for seemingly no reason, the dogs stomach gets filled with gas and twists on itself. Immediate surgery is required to reverse the condition, and many dogs die either during or soon after surgery. Aside from the emotional stress and pain, there’s also the issue of expense. We’re $1500 bucks down already (for the surgery) and just dropped her off at a 24 hour hospital which is going to cost another $500 or so per night. We’re lucky that we can afford the expense, and she’s lucky that we love her like crazy…but it does bring up the question: how far do we take this? What is the value of a dog’s life? Here we are trying desperately to save this beloved dog, who we got from a rescue 3 years ago (she was already sick, and has had orthopedic problems since)….should we be saving a human life instead?

I’ll tell the dog-lovers before I sign off that despite all the debates and questioning, the path forward is clear. We’ll do whatever it takes to have some more time with Lara. She is special, with a gentleness and human-like emotional quality we’ve never found before. What if we weren’t this lucky and didn’t have this choice to make?

Tags death, dogs, human life, Life, living, relationships, value of life | Comment (0)

Business Life People Politics Public Policy World

perception is reality

August 14, 2005 – 11:10 pm

people, to me, are the most interesting and important thing in the world. priority number one, above work, above all the things i want to and need to get done in my life (in a macro sense, all said and done). personal relationships follow, then, as a key driver of my personal happiness and satisfaction…and people watching (and thinking about what i see) follows as an absorbing hobby.

so i’ve noticed, and often think about this: how we perceive a particular situation or incident seems to differ quite a bit from person to person. not surprising, i guess, since we view the world through the lens of our individual prior experiences and what we have personally learned through these experiences.

but perception, i believe, is reality (after all, our perceptions drives personal decisions and actions, which are real and tangible). but how can it be that there are over 6 billion people in the world walking around each with their own slightly and sometimes not so slightly different view of what’s real? isn’t the world we live in fascinating?

Tags behavior, culture, People, perception | Comment (0)

rayman mathoda

Category Archives: People

Khushwant Singh’s 8 Clues to Happiness should Drive USA Housing and Social Policy

492 Days “Free Rent” For Those Choosing Foreclosure

HAFA Short Sales: A Much Needed “Fresh Start” Program For Troubled Borrowers

Responsible 2nd Chances: Loan Modifications Addressing the Issue of Negative Equity and (Borrower) Moral Hazard

Who should get to keep their home and who shouldn’t? Simplicity is key for success

Why it Never Makes Business Sense For a Bank to Foreclose on an Owner Occupied Home

The Silver Lining of The Crisis: Affordability and Humility

Announcing the creation of “HR Helping Hands”: An All Volunteer HR Professionals Mentor Network

Reconsidering my decision to tune into the Inauguration

A Roof Over Every American’s Head: Addressing the Core of our Current Crisis of Confidence

Untapped and Under-tapped Foreclosure Prevention Strategies: “Let a Hundred Flowers Bloom”

Redefining the War on Terror

The math in relationships

How the middle east will be liberated

Money Buys Happiness?

If you don’t know it, you can’t fix it? Unsexy but critical: Data/Metrics

Fitting yourself into a neat box: The problem with bundling opinions

Actions are all that matter

Value of life

perception is reality

Pages

Recent Posts

Categories

Blogroll

Archives