A Missed Opportunity for Obama

Today President Obama spoke about the economy.  He spoke about the troubles in Europe and their potential impact on the US economy.  He tried to counter the Republican line that his administration's policies have caused many of the problems in Europe.

During this speech, he stated that "the private sector is doing fine."  Within minutes, this comments spread like wildfire throughout the internet and conservative news outlets.  Mitt Romney has called the President "out of touch"and somehow tried to spin this to show that because there is still unemployment, the private sector is NOT doing fine.

Sadly, the President chose to walk back his comments rather than go head to head with Romney on this issue.  From the beginning, this election has been about the health of the economy, which stems from the irresponsible actions of the financiers on Wall Street.  This was a fantastic opportunity for the President to point out that, in fact, the private sector IS doing fine.  Have you seen the profit reports over the past 18 months?  Have you seen the DOW and NASDAQ numbers?  These indicies are higher than they were prior to the crash in 2008, yet unemployment remains high.  So, how is that the fault of Obama's policies? It sounds to me that the blame lays square with corporations, who are sitting on more liquid cash than ever.  Uncertainty is their excuse, but a pathetic excuse it is.

"Time is money" and "You have to spend money to make money" are some of the timeless cliches used in our capitalist system and every day wasted is an lost opportunity.  So you can't tell me that a bunch of successful business folks are just sitting on this money, wasting the chance to make even more money for a few percentage points in interest or their personal wealth (Bush tax cuts).  More investment happened when interest rates were higher and they did just fine, so why is it such an issue now?

The President needs to call out this ridiculous argument for what it is: an excuse for conservatives to say Willard is a better choice.  Indeed, it might be a better choice for the wealthy, but they are trying to manipulate the average Joe and Jane to believe they will somehow be better off under a Willard (Mitt) Romney reign.  Nothing but the opposite could be true and we only need to look at the Bush years to illustrate it.  

The President needs to stand up and be more firm; Democrats need to stop allowing this type of control over the discussion.  It continues to be the theme and continues to make liberals like me believe that the Democratic party is made up of a bunch of spineless goons.

National Mortgage Settlement Already a #Fail

Attorneys General across the country held press conferences this morning to boast their 'victory' against the banks, having come to a settlement called the National Mortgage Settlement.  If you haven't heard, it is an agreement by the 5 big mortgage loan servicers--JP Morgan Chase, Citi, Wells Fargo, Bank of America and Ally/GMAC--and the government, which requires the former to pay damages for practices that violated the law and caused the housing bubble burst.  You can find out more information here.

Only hours into the announcement and it appears to be another complete failure, much like the Making Homes Affordable Program from 2009.  I've contacted Chase, as outlined by the NMS website, on three occasions today and none of their representatives have any idea what I'm referring to or what to do.  They are giving me information about my foreclosed property that has nothing to do with the NMS process.  One referred me to their lawyer's office, who also has ZERO clue about this settlement.

So what's going on here?  It looks like another complete failure by both government and the banks.  We always hear the business community tell us that capitalism works and is so great because private industry can do things better and more efficiently than government.  Oh yeah?  Then why is the government making an announcement about an agreement 5 private banks made and yet the banks have no clue about it?  I've worked in a call center before; I've even worked for a banking call center.  When big news is being released, the call center is notified a day or two ahead of time in order to prepare for possible questions and responses.  That would be an efficient business model in my opinion.

It's beginning to look like another case of the run-around, whereby the government gets positive PR out of the housing crisis by appearing 'tough' against the banks.  The banks get positive press out of it because they 'settled' as opposed to getting dragged into court and 'forced' to pay out for their violations of the law.  Good PR for everyone, but empty promises for the average consumer.

It's only day one, but this is already sounding a lot like my experience with the Making Homes Affordable Program, which we all know was a failure!


As a post script, before you comment on this blog about people shouldn't own homes if they can't afford it--like this guy--go back and read my story.  I bought the place with a very well paid job and a lot of money in savings in addition to perfect, pristine credit (in the 800s).  The reason I could no longer afford my mortgage was NOT a result of overextending myself, it was a result of a collapsed economy that prevented me from finding work.  This was also the case for millions of others in America.

A Challenge to Newt Gingrich

Dear Mr. Gingrich,

Throughout this primary season, you've been pretty vocal about a lot of things.  Most important among them has been your fierce criticism of the Occupy Wall Street protesters across America.  You've also been rather aggressive in challenging President Obama to "western style" debates that would be without a timer or arbitrator.

Today, I offer a challenge to you!

This is really a no-brainer challenge, one I'm sure you'll win:  Get me back to work.

You and your ilk have recently criticized the OWS protesters and told them to "take a bath" and "get to work!"  Well, I'm ready!  In fact, I bathe daily, so no worries there.  And here's the added bonus:  I have a Master's degree, 10 years of work experience and even lived abroad in France, like you!  As a result of these studies, I'm even fluent in French, which should be a terrific asset for any corporation now that we've built such a "global" economy.

So, what do you say?  I'm sure you know a lot of people and could get me in somewhere, right?

guardian.uk

Yikes, I'm beginning to wonder if this will be as easy as I thought.  While you likely won't read this, I am certain your response would be much like those who agree with you: "Get your own job. Don't expect a hand out!"

That's such an interesting retort.  A savvy businessman like yourself is certain to understand the importance of networking to any job search.  In fact, statistics show that 80% of jobs are nabbed thanks to networking.  You've likely landed a few jobs throughout your career thanks to networking, (you know, like those lobbying jobs after being in the House?) right?  Networking is surely of the utmost important to your campaign as well; how else do you expect votes and campaign funds?   

So, Mr. Gingrich, let me tell you a little more about myself to develop that all-important networking relationship:

My name is Del Phillips.  I'm 34 years old, I'm a white male and I come from the heartland (Illinois).  Sounds like your ideal voting demographic, eh?  I've worked hard since the age of 14, holding down two part time jobs while in high school (two paper routes in the morning and a part time, after school job) and working throughout college.  I don't come from a wealthy family, so this was necessary if I wanted any of the things most teenagers wanted during my youth.

After college, I worked hard and never had any issue finding a place in an organization....until 2009.  Just as the economy tanked I, like millions of others, lost my job.  Normally this wouldn't be a big deal either, but with scores of people applying for the same position my chances began to slim.

To make a long story short, I would go from having perfect credit (820+), a $72,000/yr job, a condo (homeownership!) and an all-around happy life to foreclosure, bankruptcy (major credit hits) and 22 months of unemployment.  What's more is that after those 22 months, I landed a great position only to lose it six months later as a result of the continued lagging economy.

You and the people in your camp keep referring to people like me as "lazy" and tell us to "quit whining" and "get a job."  Would you like to see all the resumes I've sent out?  Would you like to know the number of networking events I've attended?  With a name like Gingrich, I'm sure it's always easy to find a job, but with a name like Phillips, I simply blend in with the crowd.

Another comment I hear a lot from your side of the isle is that the unemployed enjoy being unemployed;  They get to sit at home and collect a government check.  Can you honestly believe that I would prefer the roughly $18,000/yr income I receive from Unemployment Insurance benefits over the previous $72,000/yr I was earning?  If you believe that is true, I've got a bridge in Alaska to sell you.

Most, if not all, of the things you, Mr. Cain, Mr. Hannity, Mr. Limbaugh, Mr. O'Reiley and others say about the unemployed are misinformed.  Furthermore you don't contribute to solutions; you simply belittle and alienate your fellow citizens, those whom you wish to swoon for a vote.  In fact, you are even contributing to the death of many Americans.  Yes, DEATH!

Job loss, long term unemployment, losing one's home, having to file for bankruptcy, questioning one's next meal are all very shameful events.  Our culture preaches self-reliance.  But if that's not possible when there are more people without jobs than jobs available, what happens?  The unemployed deal with rejection every single day.  This rejection turns to shame and shame leads to isolation, which can ultimately turn to a complete shut-down, including suicide.


I encourage you to read this site which contains many stories of the unemployed, including those who have attempted suicide as a solution to their desperation.

Do you think this is acceptable, Mr. Gingrich?  Do you think belittling and calling names to desperate Americans is helping to get them back to work?  Do you think calling people who have been sending out hundreds of resumes a month, attended networking events, job fairs "lazy" is a way to encourage them during a difficult time?  Do you think it's alright that many feel their only hope is to turn to suicide and end it all?  I don't!

We have to stop shaming people who are trying to move forward with their lives.  In fact, we should be helping people to "Reframe Shame."  That's why I'm an aspiring keynote speaker who wants to help those experiencing shame in our daily lives from a host of events including unemployment, bankruptcy, foreclosure and much more.  One way I do that is to tell people that filing for bankruptcy is a new beginning, a lesson to learn.  Did you know that your hero Abraham Lincoln filed for bankruptcy before becoming President?  Did you know Walt Disney also filed for bankruptcy with his first film company?

These are excellent examples of how tough times may fall on you, but this adversity may just be a stepping stone to a greater success.

Mr. Gingrich, that is the type of rhetoric I'd like to hear from my government leaders.  I'd like to hear encouraging and supportive language that promotes success in all Americans.

So Mr. Gingrich, now that we know one another a little better, what do you say?   How can we network to get me working?  I'm available to speak at your association gigs or political gigs.  Certainly my first-hand experience with long-term unemployment, foreclosure, and bankruptcy can help shed light on the "average" American you so desperately need to help you win this election.  You and your party could gain such valuable insight.  Heck, it might even help others like you change your way of looking at their fellow citizen in trouble.  Together we can work to help Americans Reframe Shame and get America's economy working again!

Check out my website to learn more about me and how to contact me for an upcoming event.  I look forward to your favorable response.

Best wishes to you with your campaign and have a great Thanksgiving,

Del Phillips

PS: Thanksgiving is a great example of how strangers (Native Americans) showed compassion to desperate individuals (American colonists) in a tough time.  Maybe we should draw from that example this holiday season.

And the Hits Just Keep on Coming...

If you've been keeping up with my story, I left off discussing the beginning of the end for my condo.

With my plea for assistance rejected by the bank and the funds in my savings account approaching zero, I had to think of Plan C: What should I now do with my mortgage?  Short-sale?  Foreclosure?  These terms both carry such negative connotations and I've never been accustomed to NOT paying my bills.  The anxiety grew within me.

After researching my options of short-sale, foreclosure or bankruptcy, I decided that my best course of action would be a short sale.  Sure, my perfect credit would take a hit, but I'd be able to get the burden out from under me and I'd help the bank recoup most of the loan.

It was a big surprise that within the first 4 days of putting my place on the market, we had not one, but two offers.  The second buyer knew we had another offer coming in so they even bid ABOVE the listing price!  This was great.  The bank would be thrilled not to lose so much!

Weeks went by and from all indications, everything looked like it would work out fine.  At the last minute, however, the Loss/Mitigation department contacted me to inform me that they were willing to approve the short sale, but would still sue me for the difference.

Huh?  That's not a short sale.  In a short sale, everyone walks away a bit bruised and that meant that the bank was going to lose a bit of their money and so would I, along with my credit.

Now this is where critics of my story lament about how I had a contract with the bank and should pay the bill for which I signed my name.  Normally, I'm all for people paying their bills as promised, but there are times when people just can't.  When the well is dry, there won't be any water to drink.  So if you want to scream at me over and over in the comment section about what a terrible person I am, I've already heard it....and I'm already over it!

But I digress...we'll discuss this topic in more detail in a later post.  Back to the story.

photographer unknown

I told Hope, my friendly (not) Loss/Mitigation Rep, that this was not a short sale.  She laid down the law and I could either accept it or not.  So, I told her no.  I asked her how it made sense from a "mitigating your loss" prospective to now put me in the position to allow the place to go into foreclosure and file for bankruptcy on it.  They had an amazing offer on the table, especially considering the market at the time.  I asked how it made sense on her end to force my next move, foreclosure.  Since I was still unemployed, I would be allowed to continue living there until the foreclosure process was over (typically 15 months).  That meant at least 15 months without a mortgage payment for them, PLUS they would be responsible for property taxes.   What's more is that they would have to price the place WAY below market value as a foreclosed property, thereby losing even more money.  Pretty insane, right?  Remember, they had an amazing offer on the table that only had them losing about $45,000.

Hope then said to me "Well, you don't understand how the system works.  We'll just bundle it with other loans and sell it on the open market, making more money."  I stopped in my tracks!  I was flabbergasted!  I challenged her with "Are you telling me that you continue to use the same toxic practices that put us in this mess in the first place?"  Her response, without any shame was "Yes!"

Once again, if you feel compelled to criticize me for my actions, please re-read the paragraph above.  A financial industry that created this mess by selling toxic loans on the market, thereby creating a huge economic mess around the world, admitted to me that they were continuing these practices, despite the terrible press in the news about it! 

So that's what happened.  I called off the short sale and met with an attorney to begin the foreclosure and bankruptcy process.

Today's Reframe: Protests and Working Together

Now that the Occupy Wall Street movement has taken off and is garnering huge media attention, the push back has begun.  In fact, it was announced today that a conservative group is trying to counter the OWS movement with a "We're the 53%" movement.

What's interesting about this and other counter-movements and criticism is that they fail to see that they have more in common with the OWS protestors than they think.  Unfortunately, they are blinded and brainwashed by the typical THIS vs. THAT mentality we have been subjected to over the past few decades.

Huh?

The prevailing thought is that these OWS protesters are young and liberal.  Because the media reports it that way, the standard response is for conservatives to say the whole thing is hogwash and dismiss it.  This was not dissimilar from the Tea Party movement and how liberals reacted.  Although you may not have liked the ideas coming from the Tea Party, you had to give them credit for taking on the establishment and making themselves heard.

Now, look a little closer at the demographics from ANY news story about the OWS protests and you'll see that participants are of all ages, races and colors.  I've even seen reports that some identify themselves as Tea Partiers, others as liberals and progressives and yet others and Democrats and Republicans.

Nevermind that craziness, however, we have to paint this picture as us vs. them!

It's also become the standard mentality in the US that protesters are "crazy" and "radical."  It wasn't too long ago in our history that people took to the streets the way they do in Europe, Asia and South America.  Remember fighting for Women's Suffrage?  How about more recently with the Civil Rights protests?

Sadly, all that protesting got in the way of other interests of the wealthy, so protesters have been branded with negative connotations ever since.  Group think helps to quell large outbursts like we see in France or other countries where the right to protest is still sacred.    But I digress...

Luckily for America, those participating in the OWS events are from all walks of life.  And THAT is the power of this movement.  The Tea Partiers and Progressives disagree on many topics, but they agree that the greed and excess--both in government and private enterprise--at the expense of the average American has hit a tipping point and they are going to fight against it...together!  Indeed, it'll be a great moment for Democracy if these two groups can work together to make REAL, powerful change.

For those still confused about what "these people" are out there doing, I'd like to break things down very simply.  A lot of cliches and hyperbolic expressions have been thrown out into the discussion; the result is a message that begins to lose its power and meaning.   Here's my simple description of the matter at hand:

• Business 101 class teaches that the sole responsibilities of a corporation are to make a profit and protect the interests of its shareholders.

• Government 101 class teaches that our Government is "of the People, by the People, for the People." Our Constitution begins with "We the People..."  Using the word "People" so much seems to make it pretty clear where the focus should be.
  

Political campaigns are increasingly funded by corporations; Money flows en masse from private enterprise to political leaders.  Given the two bullet statements above, it appears that those elected to political office (ie: Government) now look to protect their interests:  Corporations.  Corporations are the "shareholders" of elected officials.  

Throughout the history of the US, we can find many illustrations of leaders who believed the People matter.  They also believed corporations had their place in our society.  For example, Woodrow Wilson said:

"America was established not to create wealth, but to realize a vision, to realize an ideal:  to discover and maintain liberty among men." (and women, too, of course!)

Theodore Roosevelt said:

"Our aim is not to do away with corporations; on the contrary, these big aggregations are an inevitable development of modern industrialism, and the effort to destroy them would be futile unless accomplished in ways that would work the utmost mischief to the entire body politic. We can do nothing of good in the way of regulating and supervising these corporations until we fix clearly in our minds that we are not attacking the corporations, but endeavoring to do away with any evil in them. We are not hostile to them; we are merely determined that they shall be so handled as to subserve the public good. We draw the line against misconduct, not against wealth."

 

I truly believe everyone has an interest in this movement, regardless of political affiliation.  There are so many common interests here for Progressives, Tea Partiers and those in between.   This doesn't need to be another fight, pitting conservatives against liberals.  Nearly everyone agrees things look grim.  If we work together as Americans, everyone will be better for it, especially the USA!