Dyslexia Forces People To Master Verbal Communication  It has long been known that dyslexics are drawn to running their own businesses, where they can get around their weaknesses in reading and writing and play on their strengths. A new study of entrepreneurs in the United Says advocates that dyslexia is much more common among small-business owners than even […]

Dyslexia Forces People To Master Verbal Communication 

It has long been known that dyslexics are drawn to running their own businesses, where they have the ability to get around their weaknesses in reading and writing and play on their strengths. A new study of entrepreneurs in the United Says advocates that dyslexia is much more common among small-business owners than even the experts had thought. Julie Logan, a professor of entrepreneurship at the Cass Business School in London, found that more than a third of the entrepreneurs she had surveyed — 35%— identified themselves as dyslexic. The study also concluded that dyslexics were more likely than nondyslexics to delegate authority, to excel in oral communication and problem solving and were twice as prone to own two or more businesses.

“We found that dyslexics who succeed had overcome an awful lot in their lives by developing compensatory skills,” Professor Logan said. One reason that dyslexics are drawn to entrepreneurship, Professor Logan stated, is that strategies they have used since childhood to offset their weaknesses in written communication and organizational capability — identifying trustworthy people and handing over major responsibilities to them — can be applied to businesses. Entrepreneurs are hands-on people who push a minimum of paper, do lots of stuff orally instead of reading and writing, and delegate authority, all of which advocates a high verbal facility. Compare that with corporate managers who read, read, read. Only 1% of corporate managers in the United Says have dyslexia.

Individuals who have difficulty reading and writing tend to deploy other strengths. They rely on mentors, and as a result, become very good at reading other people and delegating duties to them. They become adept at using visual strengths to solve problems.

For more visit Source:www.streetsideinvestor.com

Share This

Share This

Filed under: Magazines, Citigroup Inc. (C), Money and Finance Today, Personal finance, Housing, Federal Reserve

With the first Bush Administration bailout attempt likely dead after Citigroup (NYSE: C) decided to put its troubled SIV assets onto its books killing the need for the Super SIV, you might be wondering what else the Bush Administration and Congress have up their sleeves to try to mend this mortgage mess. If Alan Greenspan has anything to say about it, it would be nothing. In an opinion piece for the Wall Street Journal he wrote, “The financial erosion will come to an end when the prices of homes and equity in homes stabilize, probably not before.” Many conservatives and libertarians agree with that view and think the ideal move would be to do nothing, so that we don’t delay the point at which house prices reach bottom.

Surprisingly, the American Enterprise Institute (AEI), a conservative, market-oriented think tank, believes we might want to revisit the work of the bailout federal bureau, Home Owners’ Loan Corp., which was created to help get us out of the depression in 1933 when thousands of banks failed and millions couldn’t pay their mortgages, according to a story in the weekend Journal. This federal bureau purchased distressed mortgages from banks at a discount and refinanced them on easier terms.

Banks aren’t failing yet, but there are millions on the brink of not being able to pay their mortgages. While we’ve talked openly about $2 million with ARM resets ready to go over the deep end, some believe we haven’t seen anything yet, and credit card debt may send many more millions into trouble as the credit crunch continues to unfold.

While some fear this type of bailout could cost taxpayers money, if you look at the history of that bailout when the Home Owner’s Corp. shut its doors in 1951, it actually returned a small surplus to the U.S. Treasury, Alex Pollack of AEI told the Journal. Wow a solution that could generate a small profit, sounds good to me. I concur with Pollack that model should be revisited as a possible contingency plan.

Former Treasury Secretary Lawrence Summers thinks, “Policy has been behind the curve for months now. The dangers of doing too little are much greater than the dangers of doing too much in this context,” according to the weekend Journal story.

This past week, the Bush Administration did announce an initiative to freeze interest rates for some whose ARMs are due to reset, but only about a third of the people involved are even eligible, and many expect a far lower group will actually qualify as they apply for the freeze. The Fed did cut its short-term rate again and it also announced a plan to infuse more cash into the system by working with other central banks.

Congress is starting to move on bills that have been in the works. The Senate passed a long-awaited bill to expand the role of the Federal Housing Administration (FHA), which insures home mortgages against the danger of default primarily for low income buyers. The bill would raise the FHA limit to $417,000 from its current cap of $362,790. Final details are not yet known because the bill differs from the one passed by the House.

Other Congressional bills in the pipeline include provisions to make it easier for bankruptcy judges to help borrowers stay in their homes, tighten rules for mortgage lenders and brokers, and give Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac more leeway to help.

Basically, I agree with Summers, we need to do more. Yes a lot of greedy people have made massive mistakes and shouldn’t be bailed out at all, but a lot people were steered to subprime loans with higher interest rates so brokers could make more money even though they could have gotten prime loans. A lot of people were promised they would be able to refinance in two or three years before the reset and now they can’t given market conditions. Few predicted the real estate bubble might burst in 2007. That’s the nature of asset bubbles when they finally do burst, it’s a huge bang and not a slow fizzle. And, a lot of people who were responsible borrowers are paying the price for those who made mistakes as they watch the price of their homes go down as well.

In the 1930s, the government did have to take action to pull us out of the depression. Do we really want to wait until we actually get into a depression to act? Wouldn’t it be superior to ease some of the pain and start working on programs that can ease the pain and begin to heal our economy?

Lita Epstein has written more than 20 books including the Complete Idiot’s Guide to the Federal Reserve and The 250 Questions You Should Ask to Avoid Foreclosure.

Share This

Share This

http://www.ny= times.com/2007/12/04/business/04tobias.html?_r=3D1&oref=3Dslogin&= ref=3Dbusiness&pagewanted=3Dprint �

No Comments »