Business Blog on The Huffington Post

A version of this post first appeared on Verizon.com.

This past April, over 1,400 entrepreneurs set out on a journey with hopes of taking a big step towards making their world-changing ideas a reality by entering the 2015 Powerful Answers Award contest.

On November 4, 12 winning entrepreneurs were announced and received invitations to attend the awards presentation for the 2015 Powerful Answers Award hosted by The Talking Dead's Chris Hardwick on December 9 in San Francisco, CA. Three $1 million winners will be announced at the event. A live stream of the award presentation will be available on AOL.com and The Huffington Post. Live stream details will follow shortly.

"It's always exciting to meet these founders and entrepreneurs and share in their enthusiasm for problem solving," said senior vice president of corporate development and Verizon Ventures, John Doherty. "These winners have not only developed potential world-changing technologies, but they are leading promising companies in a time when the space is incredibly competitive."

This year's Powerful Answers Award contest consists of three categories, with a top prize of $1 million up for grabs in each category. One first runner-up and two second runners-up in each category will receive $500,000 and $250,000 prizes, respectively, for a total of $6 million awarded by Verizon.

Powerful Answers female founders shine bright

Three female-led companies are represented among this year's Powerful Answers Award winners. Of the over 1,400 entries, nearly a quarter were female-led startups. Verizon Executive Vice President and President of Product Innovation and New Businesses, Marni Walden and Huffington Post co-founder and editor-in-chief, Arianna Huffington will join these female tech leaders on stage during the awards presentation to discuss global trends in entrepreneurship and technology leadership.

The 12 winners (organized by category):

Emergency Response

A Lifeguard Drone -- Plano, TX
Lifeguard Drone combines an unmanned aerial vehicle, communication modules and a collapsible floatation device to save swimmers in distress. A wearable emergency device worn by the swimmer sends out 'SOS' signals along with its GPS location wirelessly to the lifeguard drone to activate the rescue operation. Additionally, lifeguard drones could patrol over water to detect drowning people by sending video to a monitoring network. Once a swimmer in distress is identified, the lifeguard drone flies directly above the swimmer and releases the collapsible floatation device.

Bounce Imaging -- Boston, MA
Bounce Imaging provides public servants with cutting-edge technologies that allow them to see what lies ahead in those dangerous environments so they can make decisions that are safer for them and for the civilians they seek to serve and protect. A user can toss our low-cost, throwable omnidirectional cameras into a room, tunnel, attic, or other potentially-hazardous area and get back real-time - 360-degree-in-all-directions video and sensor data about what is going on inside.

Disaster Mesh -- San Francisco, CA
Disaster Mesh provides an air-deployable, Wi-Fi mesh network to disaster zones. The Disaster Mesh Ephemeral Physical Network uses small devices, or "Seeds," that serve as the network's nodes, spread over the disaster area. The devices will be produced in mass numbers and air dropped into the disaster location by plane, helicopter, or drone. Once the survivors connect to the network, the collected information (GPS coordinates and names of the survivors) are then organized and distributed to relief organizations.

EmergenSee -- Malvern, PA
EmergenSee®'s revolutionary technology turns your smartphone into a personal security system that instantly streams live video, audio, GPS location and movements to pre-selected contacts or EmergenSee's Professional Responders when threatening and potentially dangerous situations are encountered. With just one tap, responders can immediately see, hear, communicate and follow an incident as it unfolds, allowing responders to effectively react to the situation at hand and get you the immediate help needed.

Internet of Things

CityTaps -- Île-de-France
CityTaps vision is to run water in every urban home. The team provides a smart water metering service that enables the urban poor to micro-pay for water to their local utility, at any time with any mobile phone. No smartphones or apps are needed.

Owlet -- Provo, UT
The Owlet Baby Monitor is the only monitor that uses hospital technology -- pulse oximetry -- to truly alert parents if their baby stops breathing. Owlet conducted accuracy testing at Seattle Children's Hospital and will be filing for FDA clearance to create a medical version of the Owlet Monitor. Owlet's big vision is to create the largest infant health data set the world has ever seen and connect the hospital to the home via smart hardware.

Smart Barn -- Kettering, OH
The Smart Barn app and wireless sensors allow farmers to obtain, store, and track data seamlessly. The most common sensors monitor temperature, air quality, power supply, feed use, water quality and usage, and security. Additionally, Smart Barn's service allows farmers to create and receive custom notifications if an intolerant condition occurs. Farmers can view the real-time farm conditions using an iOS or Android app.

Zizmos Technology -- Palo Alto, CA
Zizmos provides earthquake-early warning and high-resolution earthquake hazard maps for urban areas. We are building a novel sensor network with mobile technology and cloud computing. Zizmos disseminates critical information when it's needed most.

Transportation

iHelmet -- Kadawatha, Sri Lanka
'iHelmet' is an intelligent motorcycle helmet that is capable of providing safety, convenience & situational-awareness features found in high-end automobiles, to an ordinary motorcyclist. It uses an array of sensors built into a special device which has to be attached to the motorcycle helmet. This device communicates with the user's smartphone via Bluetooth wireless technology and the app constantly monitors sensor readings to provide warnings and other functionalities appropriately.

i4drive -- Tel Aviv, Israel
i4drive enhances driver safety & driving experience by turning the smartphone from a distraction into a powerful driver assistant. i4drive's advanced software technology provides drivers real-time warnings, assistance, telemetry tools and driver-to-driver communication in emergency events.

Pogo -- Seattle, WA
Pogo is a new way to secure trusted rides for your kids. We help you discover new carpool connections across all of your trusted groups, such as schools, teams, and neighborhood groups. If a carpool ride isn't available, our thoroughly screened and trained paid drivers are there as a backstop.

Swiftmile -- San Mateo, CA
Swiftmile built the worlds first Light Electric Vehicle sharing system where users can check out/in e-bikes or e-scooters using our SwiftmApp at any one of our Swiftmile charging stations. These smart, solar-powered charging stations can be quickly deployed on corporate campuses, universities, resorts, near bus stops, train stations, etc.

Jerry Rizzo manages public relations and storytelling for Powerful Answers Award.

The Powerful Answers Award is a multi-million dollar challenge for entrepreneurs, companies and innovators worldwide to provide innovative solutions to the world's biggest problems. In it's third year, Powerful Answers Award is excited as ever to share stories of the people behind the technologies leaving a positive impact in three areas: transportation, emergency response and the Internet of Things. For more information, visit here.

-- This feed and its contents are the property of The Huffington Post, and use is subject to our terms. It may be used for personal consumption, but may not be distributed on a website.

Motokuni Takaoka, the founder, President and CEO of airweave, the leading manufacturers of premium bedding toppers, is one of the most innovative entrepreneurs I've ever met. He's the master of re-invention and branding partnerships and he's proof positive that if you look for answers outside of the box, you'll find unconventional wisdom that will enable you to build a massive empire out of the ashes of a flailing business model.

Founded in 2004, airweave began when Mr. Takaoka took over his uncle's company, a manufacturer of plastic fishing line. At first, Takaoka tried to save the flailing fishing line business, but the more he studied the market opportunities and the more he understood the product they were producing, he began to realize that the product they were producing could be re-invented for a new and better use, enabling the firm to enter an entirely new business vertical rife with opportunity throughout the world.

Mr. Takaoka discovered that the plastic resins produced through an injection molding process had unique physical properties, and he began developing prototypes for an entirely new application that would turn the bedding industry upside down. The result was the airweave mattress topper, whose state of the art inner material consists of resin fibers that offer a high level of comfort for better quality sleep. The airweave mattresses are between 2-3 inches thick and are meant to be rolled out on top of a regular mattress, allowing for life enhancing sleep that minimizes stress on the body and reduces the effects of restlessness. Recovery through sleep is a critical factor in maintaining optimal health, a competitive edge, and peace of mind, especially for athletes.

In ten short years, Motokuni Takaoka, reinvented a fishing line company, created a brand new business vertical, and grew it into a $100M empire. In 2014 Takaoka broke into the United States market via online sales and in February of 2015 he opened a flagship store in Manhattan's SoHo district. Takaoka says that now that Japan has been forever changed by his life altering sleep technology, he's ready to duplicate his success in the United States, and around the world.

How does one entrepreneur single handedly invent a new industry and grow it into a $100M empire? Here are Motokuni Takaoka's 3 simple lessons on sleeping your way to the top:

Pull, Don't Push: When Takaoka first considered his marketing strategy for airweave, he carefully studied the industry closest to his, the mattress industry. He says that the mattress industry has marketed itself the same from day one. They push people into their stores through television, print, and radio advertising and then once the consumer lands in the store, there is a pushy sales person working clients by getting them to sit and lay down on a sampling of beds. Takaoka knew from the start, push marketing wasn't in his future. He says that he's selling way more than a mattress topper, he's selling a better lifestyle to the client, and that is not a concept that can be pushed onto a consumer. No, he realized that he was going to have to prove to the masses that his mattress toppers could minimize joint pressure, relieve restlessness, and create better lives for consumers.

But the question was, how? In 2008, Takoaka decided to start working on a marketing campaign that would pull customers in by proving what airweave could do with Olympic athletes. He started by giving airweave mattresses to a team of Olympic athletes to see if they experienced better athletic performance having had the benefit of a new kind of sleep. Not only did the team admittedly perform better, they had the world watching and when pictures were snapped as the Olympians traveled through airports, they were carrying their airweaves. For the last 10 years, Takaoka says that the number one way he has grown his business is by letting very high profile athletes try his products and those people have become the unpaid advocates, cheerleaders, and sales people for airweave. They are the ones that pull everyday consumers into the airweave brand.

The airweave partnerships have grown over the years to include:

• Several National Olympic Delegations including the United States, Austria, France, Germany, Switzerland and Japan. Nearly 33% of the medaling athletes at the Sochi 2014 Olympic Winter Games were members of Olympic Teams to which airweave supplied bedding toppers
• Top amateur and professional athletes around the globe, including two-time Masters Champion Bubba Watson, U.S. Olympic Gold medalist ice dancers, Meryl Davis and Charlie White and U.S. Olympic Gold medalist swimmer Ryan Lochte
• Students at the Paris Opera Ballet School, where all beds in the dormitory are furnished with airweave bedding toppers
• Students at The Royal Ballet School in London where airweave mattress toppers have been introduced to their younger students at White Lodge dormitory
• More than 500 students of IMG Academy whose residence hall features airweave bedding toppers. (Sleep research has been conducted at the academy to measure the effect of airweave bedding toppers on individual athletic performance.)
• First and business class passengers of Japan Airlines international flights
• Guests at high-end hotels, such as Four Seasons Hotel Tokyo at Marunouchi, The Ritz Carlton Shanghai Pudong, The Ritz-Carlton Beijing Financial Street and Park Hyatt Shanghai, The Kitano and Andaz Fifth Avenue in New York City

Understand What You Sell: The second success secret Mr. Takaoka shared was that too many companies do not delve deep to really understand what they are selling. He says that he could never have built a $100M empire if he were selling bedding toppers. He says that if he went in that direction, he'd be compared to the mattress industry, and he'd be going up against an industry that is hundreds of years old. Takaoka says that he sells a lifestyle. Why do people buy cosmetics? They want to feel better. Why do people buy memberships to a gym? They want to feel better. Why do people buy health food? They want to feel better. Takaoka says that his growth has been the result of understanding that his value proposition is in a vertical that is totally different than the industry most closely related to him, mattresses. His value proposition is that airweave provides a better tomorrow for those who sleep with his brand.

Find a Business That Hasn't Been Reinvented Yet: When Takaoka was originally considering how his patented plastics technology could be reinvented from its original use into a product that could change the world, he was attracted to the mattress industry because this is one industry that simply has not been changed in decades. Coil mattresses have been made the same way since the beginning. While almost every other business and technology has been reinvented, including transportation/ride sharing, media/television delivery, photography/smartphones, the mattress manufacturing industry had yet to be reinvented. Takaoka says that the plastics technology he has founded has many potential uses, but the one that had the greatest opportunity was in creating an entirely new lifestyle vertical through mattress toppers.

Takaoka has redefined the way any entrepreneur can sleep his or her way to success. He has disrupted, reinvented, and recreated a whole new business vertical, and he says that the best is yet to come. He has proven that pulling instead of pushing, understanding his value proposition, and reinventing that which has been stagnant for decades, are simple yet effective strategies for monumental success.

You can visit their website at www.airweave.com.

-- This feed and its contents are the property of The Huffington Post, and use is subject to our terms. It may be used for personal consumption, but may not be distributed on a website.

What the heck happened to Chris Christie?

Christie was the favorite. He was the Republicans' golden boy. I've never met him, but it's clear that he's a good guy. He's straightforward and real. He jokes around with Jimmy Fallon and handles town hall confrontations well. He has his flaws. But that makes him genuine. He seems like the perfect Republican candidate: a believer in lower taxes, less government, reduced entitlements and a strong military. And yet, he can't get traction with voters. His poll numbers, never impressive to begin with, have dropped so far that just last night he was demoted to the Junior Varsity debate. It seems like he's on his way out. And he probably is. But why? And what does this have to do with your business?

Everything. Particularly if you're growing. If you've learned anything from watching the downward spiral of Chris Christie you can take away this: you don't want to make the big mistake that he made. And that mistake was "Bridgegate."

Bridgegate was the scandal back in 2013, remember? That was when huge traffic jams were created across the highly trafficked George Washington Bridge to and from New York City, allegedly through collusion by certain members of Christie's staff and political appointees. The likely reason? Revenge on a nearby opponent (the mayor of Fort Lee, New Jersey). Indictments were issued. Christie denied any involvement and it was never proved that he knew what was going on. But it didn't matter. When voters look at Christie, they think about Bridgegate. It's the Bridgegate issue that has most stuck to him all through this presidential campaign. It killed him. But it was his fault.

Sure, he seemed to handle the situation as best he could. He held press conference after press conference, public meeting after public meeting, all where he denied any knowledge of the scheme. He fired senior staffers. He testified in front of committees. Investigations into his conduct found no smoking gun. No one could ever prove that he was involved. But he was the boss. And this was a management failure. And now he's paying the price.

There are many lessons here. You're only as good as the last thing you do. Your people are representative of you. Your tone matters. A good diet, combined with plenty of exercise, can help you lose weight (sorry, couldn't resist). But here's the most important thing that every leader can learn from the sad fall of Chris Christie: you may not be ready for a bigger stage.

Christie had too many problems in his own state to launch a presidential campaign. Taxes are still too high. The state's transit system is in disarray. Budget deficits continued to plague his government. Many tasks and promises remain unfulfilled. And as these problems continued to mount, Christie began to lose local support. His poll numbers, never strong in a Democrat state, fell and have continued to fall throughout his presidential campaign. In short, he still had a lot of things to accomplish in his own state.

And yet he ignored these problems at home and chose to spend a significant time on the national stage, building a campaign, appearing on TV, spending time on the road at party events and fundraising activities, all preparing for a 2016 White House run. Calls of "absentee governor" became more frequent. And it's obvious his staffers were left without enough supervision. Otherwise, it's very possible that stupid things like Bridgegate could have been avoided. Christie chose to grow nationally without first getting his local house in order. So how about you?

Is your house in order? Are you as profitable as you can be? Is everything humming along and managed well? Do you have a good organizational structure in place with a good system of reporting and oversight? If you can answer yes to these questions, and you desire to expand, then go for it. But take it from Chris Christie: if you don't completely have your act together in your own home state, you may want to hold off on those big-time aspirations until you do. There are many lessons to be learned from the sad fall of Chris Christie. But for business leaders, growing before you're ready is probably the most important one.

A version of this column previously appeared on Inc.com.

-- This feed and its contents are the property of The Huffington Post, and use is subject to our terms. It may be used for personal consumption, but may not be distributed on a website.

Unicorns might be mythical creatures, but in Silicon Valley, they're alive and well. In fact, more than 120 of them are thriving in the not-so-natural habitat of overfunding, overgrowing, overpopulated area of the world -- Silicon Valley.

A "unicorn" is a startup whose valuation is $1 billion or higher. The unicorn's bigger brother, the decacorn is a startup with $10 billion valuation or higher. We live in "The Age of Unicorns" according to Fortune.

These booming businesses are the stuff of living legends -- the likes of Uber, Airbnb, SpaceX, and Snapchat. Their leaders are celebrities. Their products are ubiquitous. And their disruptive, game-changing, head-turning, industry-upsetting model is what millions of entrepreneurs aspire to.

But is unicorn status truly worthy of aspiration?

I'd suggest caution. Here's why.

1. Valuation isn't the end-all.

Let's talk about valuation. Valuation is, after all, the single reason why any startup can qualify as a unicorn.

John Collison, Stripe's co-founder, is skittish when it comes to startup valuation. Here's what he told Mashable:

"I get an involuntary twitch every single time someone refers to us using valuation as kind of a shorthand. The focus on valuations seems really misplaced. Learning a valuation doesn't really tell you much about the business and it becomes this weird scoreboard thing or ranked list."

That's precisely what the Unicorn Club has become -- a "scoreboard" and a "ranked list."

High valuation does not predict success any more than a stock picker can predict which stocks will outperform the market.

2. Unicorns get eaten.

If your goal is to be acquired someday, fine. This point might not persuade you.

But if your goal is to become the world's next global brand, viz. Facebook, Apple, or Google, take heed. Your unicorn status makes you prime prey for the existing global startups, viz. Facebook, Apple, or Google.

Once you join the billion-dollar elite startups, your name gets appended to the "Who Do We Acquire Next" memo for Facebook's board meeting, or Google's executive meetup.

Examples?

Facebook acquired WhatsApp.

Facebook acquired Instagram.

Facebook acquired Oculus VR.

Google acquired Nest Labs.

Google acquired Motorola.

Microsoft acquired Minecraft.

Microsoft acquired Mojang.

Apple acquired Beats.

The existing billion dollar companies eagerly swallow the billion-dollar startups. The only people better than VCs at spotting hot startups are the companies hoping to acquire hot startups.

If you're a unicorn or on the fast track to become one, don't be surprised if "Mark Zuckerberg" appears on your caller ID.

3. $1 billion is psychological cotton candy.

A billion bucks is a lot. But why a billion? What's so special about that number besides its enormity?

The answer lies in psychology. The brain likes big, round, numbers. An investor's brain, metric-driven as it may be, is no different.

Financial psychologist Brad Klontz describes investors as if they are patients suffering from mental malady. He explains in the Wall Street Journal,

"These [big, round] numbers can have a huge influence on investor emotion and behavior. When it comes to investing, we're all just a herd of antelope, skittish and afraid."

The herd of antelopes is chasing the herd of unicorns with their VC cash. But in the wild unpredictability of the startup world, numbers can lose meaning. Besides its status a fat three-comma number, a billion dollar valuation means little else.

4. It feels "bubblicious."

The graying veterans of the dot-com era are not sanguine about the unicorns. Their gloomy prediction is that "we're in a bubble." Again.

Why are we in a bubble? "Because valuations are so high."

These sage words are from Logitech's Bracken Darrell. As a gray-hair over fifty, Darrell remembers the year 2000, Pets.com, eXcite, Boo.com, GeoCities, and Razorfish. He remembers when the dot com bubble went bust.

One can only wonder if we're headed towards a similar bubble. Someday, we might be reminiscing, "Remember Snapchat? Oh, and that company...what was it, Dropbox? Oh, yeah, Spotify -- did you ever use that?"

5. Valuation does not translate into funding.

As Fortune warned, "aggressive fundraising is no guarantee that unicorns will grow into their valuations."

Remember, a valuation is not a dollar amount. It's an estimation -- a transitory speculation of an entity's worth.

In a bullish tech market agog over the likes of Slack and Snapchat, of course the professional appraisers will aim high.

But the fact that these are big-sounding valuations should suggest caution, at least. It's true that VCs are unicorn-gazing with intensity, but at the same time, valuation does not guarantee funding. And without funding, the unicorn may not be able to mature.

6. Valuation does not predict profitability.

In the heady world of billion-dollar metrics, it can be easy to lose sight of a startup's main objective. It's not funding. It's not Fortune's List. It's not an IPO. It's not even "growth."

It's profitability.

It's astonishing to realize that a startup whose valuation has skyrocketed beyond the billion dollar point may not be profitable, nor anywhere near it.

Some unicorns seem to forget this. Take Slack's Stewart Butterfield, for example. Butterfield asserts,

"You'd have to be in a meteors-hitting-the-Earth scenario before Slack as a business would get into trouble."

To talk likelihood, meteors-hitting-the-Earth are scientifically more probable than unicorns, so maybe Slack is correct in a sad sort of way.

Just because you've hit a magic valuation number doesn't mean that your business is bulletproof. In fact, such billion-dollar stargazing might actually keep you from seeing some of the harsher realities of business life.

The ecommerce entrant, Fab, was once hailed as a billion dollar startup, but their CEO, Jason Goldberg admits that the business is nowhere near the unicorn status it once held.

His pessimistic riff on the unicorn trend might be a touch closer to the truth than Butterfield's audacious line about meteors. Here's what Goldberg said:

"If you allow yourself to believe you're worth $1 billion after two to three years of being in business, you're going to get yourself caught up in trouble."

Conclusion

Time will tell.

Being a unicorn isn't all bad. You get some great press, a lot of buzz, and your face appears all over the Internet. That can be fun.

Yet unicorn status could be chimeric. I guess that's what I'm trying to say. I believe that business success and life fulfillment can be had in spades whether or not you believe in unicorns.

Do you think that unicorns are overrated or overvalued?

-- This feed and its contents are the property of The Huffington Post, and use is subject to our terms. It may be used for personal consumption, but may not be distributed on a website.

On Friday, November 13, 1992 I was fired from my job as a fundraiser at a non-profit I loved on the day I was to receive my one-year review.

I was devastated because my track record in this one and all the jobs I held up to that point had been successful, very successful. I was devastated because the grounds for my firing were not there; an internal personality conflict - I had been warned about - was the real reason I was walked out of the building that morning after the very brief annual-review-turned-firing. I was devastated because I had left the world of political fundraising so I could use my prowess for asking for money for a good cause and improve the lives of others.

I couldn't imagine a personality conflict would cost me my job when the goal of the work we were doing was to improve the quality of life for people with disease.

I wanted desperately to have my case heard and to correct the misinformation about me. If the right people heard me, my name could be cleared.

When I proposed reaching out to the chair of the non-profit and to the board members who knew me, my father, a lawyer and my great advisor said, "write the letter, read it, throw it away and move on."

I took his advice and did that. Twelve weeks later I had a new job raising money for a campaign for mayor in an office eight blocks from the non-profit offices. In our meeting the candidate said he wanted to "improve the quality of life for New Yorkers."

A little over a year later, sitting in my new City Hall office as a result of my candidate's win, I received a hand written letter from the person who was instrumental in having me fired (the source of the personality conflict). She congratulated me on my new post after she had read about it in the paper. After the congratulations, she asked if I would help her secure my new boss, Mayor Giuliani for an event to help the non-profit from which I had been fired.

Later, during a scheduling meeting I was asked if his participation in an event for this cause would be a good use of Rudy's time and I said, yes.

I kept the beautifully written note of congratulations and request for help in my desk that day and in the many desks I operated from for years. I kept it as a reminder that life moves on and we need to move on with it. She moved on. I moved on. I gained nothing by lamenting over all that was wrong with my firing and gained plenty by ridding myself of the anger and disappointment.

As a result, I found a place to use my talents and give back in a different position than the one I originally envisioned.

The key lessons learned from this Friday the 13th firing came over time and became clearer the further away I got from that bad day.

1.) Be Sad.
Yup. Take it in. Feel everything that comes with the loss of something you counted on that ended in a way you had no control over. It's awful. Take the time to be sad.

2.) Get Your Power Back.
Check. You've been sad. Now it's time to get moving. While the wounds may not have healed, moving forward is the best way to uncover why it happened. It's also important to remember that whoever "did" it to you has moved on. If you keep the sadness and anger in your heart, you give away your power.

3.) Be open.
Your chance to use your talents to improve lives may be in a different place than the one you envisioned. Be open to the offers in the new spaces you may enter after your firing.

Jeanne M. Stafford is writing a book on Asperger's, Improv and Communicating with Power. She trains her audiences and coaching clients to communicate powerfully using improv techniques. Sign up for her FREE 30 Days of YES and find out how using YES words can empower you to possibility. Follow Jeanne on twitter @jeannestafford and visit her website http://jeannemstafford.com

-- This feed and its contents are the property of The Huffington Post, and use is subject to our terms. It may be used for personal consumption, but may not be distributed on a website.

A year ago my B Team colleagues Sir Richard Branson, Arianna Huffington, Francois-Henri Pinault, Guilherme Leal, Ngozi Okonjo-Iwaela and Paul Polman and I published an open letter to the G20 arguing that exposing the corporate shell game is good for business -- and the world.

What we said then is still true today: "anonymous shell companies allow criminals and corrupt businesses and officials to hide money and evade law enforcement. Anonymous shell companies have been used to siphon off government revenues from the sale of natural resources in developing countries, while drug cartels have laundered millions of dollars through the United States using these vehicles."

The G20 took an excellent first step a year ago by adopting High Level Principles for Beneficial Ownership Transparency -- committing to require that companies disclose their owners so that corruption and impunity can be reduced and competitiveness and transparency in business improved.

The Transparency International report Just for Show? Reviewing G20 Promises on beneficial ownership published this week shows clear gaps in the current regulation of beneficial ownership in many G20 countries. Fifteen out of the G20 members have an average or weak legal framework for beneficial ownership transparency when their current laws and regulations are assessed against the ten principles the G20 Leaders adopted last year.

Transparency International highlights that G20 governments need to tighten oversight on companies, banks and the people who help the corrupt. High profile cases of corruption in the past year -- including Petrobras, Viktor Yanukovych, and FIFA -- demonstrate the prevalence of anonymous companies and the consistent use of professional middle men and banks to hide or launder money. Governments can also make it easier for banks, accountants, lawyers and other businesses to stay clean by identifying corrupt customers.

The gap between commitment and results is large. There is significant work for all of us to do. The G20 governments have started to move, producing action plans for their implementation that are published this week. Some are moving faster than others, with the UK Central Registry set to go online in 2016.

We believe there is a strong business case for beneficial ownership transparency: it increases competitiveness, reduces risk by allowing businesses to know who they are doing business with, helps manage financial exposure and increases the stability of the financial system. Lastly, for bad actors, it reduces impunity, allowing law enforcement to track them down and hold them to account for corruption and crime.

Along with our colleagues through the B20 we are continuing to identify business use cases for beneficial ownership transparency and to work to put these into practice. A workshop of thirty companies in Paris in June articulated a first 15 use cases -- now available in a new report. These use cases go beyond knowing your customer and knowing your partners, to being able to see systemic risks around ownership in corporate groups and value chains, addressing employee and investor concerns, and dealing with specific cases to do with specially designated persons, public procurement projects, localization requirements and shipping transport. We invite all interested businesses to become involved in these discussions, currently planned for Nairobi, Dehli, London, New York, Beijing and Panama in coming months.

A year after our letter to the G20, we remain committed to getting this job done, working with G20 governments and we welcome the steps by G20 governments to turn their commitments into real results.

In 2016 we hope to see significant action on beneficial ownership transparency in G20 countries, helping to build up a global norm and standard that other countries can easily adopt.

Harmonisation is not just important between countries but also across the agenda of the G20. This year, the G20 is agreeing to two new important sets of principles -- on Procurement and Open Data. It is crucial that we connect the dots between these sets of principles to make sure that beneficial ownership disclosure is a requirement of procurement systems, and that business can access company ownership information to enable them to know who they are doing business with.

As the G20 adopts more principles, it is time for all of us to make sure we move from words to deeds on beneficial ownership transparency.

-- This feed and its contents are the property of The Huffington Post, and use is subject to our terms. It may be used for personal consumption, but may not be distributed on a website.

At the core of every successful business is a value proposition. Also called the USP (unique selling proposition), this little bit of verbiage forms the entire reason for a company's existence.

Consider, for example, some of the world's most notable brands. While you may not be able to quote their unique selling proposition, you nonetheless know what that company uniquely provides.

Starbucks is committed to creating high-quality beverages that a customer loves. Here's a statement of their USP: "Love your beverage or let us know. We'll always make it right."

Apple is known for their versatile, functional, and innovative technology tools like the iPhone and iPad. With their proprietary operating system, high price point, and integrated medley of devices, Apple has a unique status in the market.

"10 Things" manifesto: "Focus on the user and all else will follow. Today's Google's position as the premier method of searching for information is unparalleled.

A unique selling proposition makes a company go. When you develop and focus on your unique selling proposition, you are starting the engine for business success.

A USP allows you to focus on the one thing that you love to do, that you do well, and that your customers truly want.

Does a business need a unique selling proposition?

The answer is an absolute yes.

Only 69% of B2B businesses today have an established value proposition. For some reason, many companies disregard the critical nature and valuable opportunity provided by a unique selling proposition.

A weak or nonexistent USP can ruin conversion rates, sales, and all the other good things that marketers crave. A clear, strong, and customer-focused USP will do just the opposite -- boost conversions, create a fanatic tribe, and satisfy customers to the core.

If you want business success, then you're going to need to develop a USP.

A step-by-step method to creating a USP.

Creating a USP isn't difficult. You simply need to take the time to do it.

Figure out exactly what your customer wants. This is the selling part of the unique selling proposition. In order to know what your customer wants, you must first identify who your customer is. Do some market research. Create a target persona. Identify the customer's psychographics. Learn what it is your customer craves. You must conduct this first step in combination with the second step. Your customer's wants and your business's unique product meet at an important point -- the value that you offer.

Identify what makes you unique. What makes your business unique? It's not going to be your logo, your name, or your website. It's going to be something deeper -- the method, quality, or substance of your product. Your ultimate deliverable must have some unique quality or it will fail to gain traction in a competitive market. If nothing unique instantly comes to mind, then you probably have some work to do on your business. If you can't identify the unique value in your business, then how will your customers? A USP is something specific. "Great coffee!" doesn't cut it. Neither does "the best coffee you've ever tasted." The unique selling proposition needs to meet the customer's desires, while also identifying your business as the sole provider meeting this need. "We serve you the highest-quality lattes in record time...with a smile!" This gets more detailed: Lattes. Fast. From friendly people.

State this unique trait in a customer-focused way. Bring the customer's want and your unique trait together in a single statement. Don't stress over grammatical perfection. Simply get the sense of the statement right.

Remember, the USP isn't something that you need to publish on your blog, post on your main page, or write a press release about.

It is, rather, a force -- something that powers the way you do business. While you probably will state it in many places and by many methods, a USP is something that is simply lived out in the way you do business.

Examples of USPs

Here are some well known USPs.

InfusionSoft: Small business sales and marketing software. Get organized. Grow sales. Save time.

Enterprise: Pick Enterprise. We'll Pick You Up.

Target: Expect More. Pay Less.

Geico: 15 Minutes Could Save You 15 Percent or More on Car Insurance.

Stripe: Payment infrastructure for the internet. Whenever you're building a marketplace, mobile app, online storefront, or subscription service, Stripe has the features you need."

Shopify: Shopify is everything you need to sell everywhere.

Domino's Pizza: You get fresh, hot pizza delivered to your door in 30 minutes or less, or it's free.

NyQuil: The nighttime, coughing, achy, sniffling, stuffy head, fever, so you can rest medicine.

TOMS: With every pair you purchase, TOMS will give a pair of new shoes to a child in need. One for One."

KISSmetrics: KISSmetrics gives you the insights you need to optimize your marketing."

SoundCloud: Hear the world's sounds. Explore trending music and audio."

VooD

Avis: We're number two. We try harder.

Saddleback Leather: They'll Fight Over it When You're Dead.

M&Ms: The milk chocolate melts in your mouth, not in your hand.

Slogan or Selling?

A USP doesn't have to be your slogan as it is with many of the above examples. The USP isn't a marketing rally cry. It's something that functions internally to give you focus and profitability.

I mentioned above that you don't need to stress over grammatical perfection. A USP doesn't need to be wordsmithed to the last letter. All you need is a substantive phrase that meets the user's needs, your essence, and ties it together in a functional statement.

A slogan helps capture attention. A USP helps to sell a product.

Conclusion

What do you do with your USP? You allow it to steer the company.

A USP guides you toward your target audience. At the same time, the USP helps you hone in on the central reason that you exist, thus improving on what you do best.

The USP shows up in the way that you create your PPC ads, design landing pages, write website content, interact with customers, and post on social media.

Of course, your USP can and should evolve over time, becoming stronger, more focused, and even more appealing to the right customer.

What is your experience with developing a USP?

-- This feed and its contents are the property of The Huffington Post, and use is subject to our terms. It may be used for personal consumption, but may not be distributed on a website.

Pent-up democratic aspirations were unleashed this week in Myanmar's first free election in decades, resulting in a landslide victory for Aung San Suu Kyi and her opposition party. But as Mark Farmaner and Hanna Hindstrom point out, it is "democracy on a leash" as the long-standing military rulers retain a constraining foothold through the current constitutional arrangement. It remains to be seen if Suu Kyi's elected government will be "above" those constraints, as she has boldly asserted. Writing from Yangon, Ma Thida lays out the many issues in the political transition ahead.

Harrison Akins reminds us that the "shadow" over Myanmar's democratic turn is the continuing persecution and discrimination against the Muslim Rohingya minority. In this week's "Forgotten Fact," we look at why the Rohingya could be the world's next big refugee crisis.

If it stabilizes, Myanmar could have a bright future. It sits between the two fastest growing economies in the world, India and China, the second of which is revitalizing the ancient Silk Road trading route that George Yeo, Singapore's former foreign minister, sees as making Eurasia the driver of the future global economy.

In our "Third Industrial Revolution" series this week, Jeremy Rifkin similarly sees the digital link up between Europe and China through the Eurasian landmass as shifting the economic center of gravity in the world. Byron McCormick says the Third Industrial Revolution is a kind of encompassing Moore's Law that will unfold at an exponential pace. In her contribution to the series, Lisa Gansky argues that the new "Sharing Economy" can create value from waste. Jonathon Porritt describes how we can reach a low-carbon future even if the Paris climate talks fail. Alexander Kaufman reports that, according to the International Energy Agency, half the power plants built over the last year around the world produce green energy.

In remarks adapted from a speech last week at the Berggruen Institute's "2nd Understanding China" conference in Beijing, Fu Ying, chair of the Foreign Affairs Committee of China's National People's Congress, outlines China's vision of global order. Eric Olander and Cobus van Staden report that China's "land imperialism" in Africa is a myth and that Chinese investments in agriculture are "feeding Africa." After examining the newly released details, economist Jeffrey Sachs says the Trans-Pacific Partnership, or TPP, is "too flawed for a simple yes vote in the U.S. Congress."

As the G-20 gets underway in Turkey, former Mexican President Ernesto Zedillo ponders whether the "new normal" slowdown of growth in China can be a catalyst to make global economic coordination more effective.

Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu visited Washington this week in an attempt to make amends with President Obama. In an investigative report Amir Tibon & Tal Shalev describe the relationship as a tense marriage. Zeina Azzam worries about the compensatory arms package Israel will receive from the U.S. to reassure it after the Iran nuclear deal. Sultan Barakat scores the influence of Israel's "right wing" and blames it for fomenting the Palestinian uprising. In a passionate "open letter" to Hillary Clinton, Layali Awwad calls on the U.S. presidential candidate not to betray the rights of Palestinian women.

Writing from Paris, philosopher Bernard-Henri Levy encourages the French government to "move forward ... determinedly, but without illusion, the card of rapprochement and dialogue" with Iran. In the wake of bombings in Beirut, Faysal Itani describes the "minority trap of the Levant." Also from Paris, Munawar Anees explains why some of the ways to achieve global harmony may actually be found in Islamic ethics.

From India, Pawan Khera assesses the election defeat of Prime Minister Narendra Modi's Hindu nationalist BJP party in state elections in Bihar. He argues the message to the BJP is "reboot or get booted out." Marvin Weinbaum sees a kind of reconciliation with the Taliban, "where many seem willing to believe their promises to govern differently than in the past" as key to peace in Afghanistan.

IMF Managing Director Christine Lagarde weighs in on the European migration crisis, which she says requires a "global solution." Writing from Beirut, Robert Fadel notes that while Britain debates how it will absorb 20,000 refugees, Lebanon does so weekly. World Reporter Nick Robins-Early and Alexandra Ma profile a former child refugee from Afghanistan who is now dedicated to helping new refugees fleeing to Europe and report on a U.K. nonprofit providing trailers to the Calais refugee camp in France as the chilly temperatures of winter arrive. A photo essay takes a look behind the scenes at the camp. Egyptian journalist Sara Khorshid thanks Canada for remaining a beacon for humanity "when many across the world were losing faith in human rights and democracy for reasons related to security challenges ... and the intensification of the war against terror." Roque Planas looks at the refugee crisis from another angle -- those fleeing to the U.S. from violence in Guatemala.

In an essay evaluating their latest novels, Claire Fallon wonders if Michel Houellebecq is the French Jonathan Franzen.

Fusion this week looks at a new alert device called "Athena" to protect women who are facing sexual assault, but laments it is necessary. Our Singularity series this week reports that "personal" satellites are becoming affordable enough to be widespread.

Finally, this week's photo essays portray the Festival of Lights celebration of Diwali in India, showcase the appeal of online shopping across China and present a photographic portrait of Italy's oldest crime syndicates. We also invite you to read the tattooed symbols on the faces of Berber women as a way of peering into a very old culture and see Syrian children go behind the lens to show life as refugees.

WHO WE ARE

EDITORS: Nathan Gardels, Senior Advisor to the Berggruen Institute on Governance and the long-time editor of NPQ and the Global Viewpoint Network of the Los Angeles Times Syndicate/Tribune Media, is the Editor-in-Chief of The WorldPost. Farah Mohamed is the Managing Editor of The WorldPost. Kathleen Miles is the Senior Editor of The WorldPost. Alex Gardels and Peter Mellgard are the Associate Editors of The WorldPost. Katie Nelson is the National Editor at the Huffington Post, overseeing The WorldPost and HuffPost's editorial coverage. Eline Gordts is HuffPost's Senior World Editor. Charlotte Alfred and Nick Robins-Early are World Reporters. Rowaida Abdelaziz is Social Media Editor.

CORRESPONDENTS: Sophia Jones in Istanbul; Matt Sheehan in Beijing.

EDITORIAL BOARD: Nicolas Berggruen, Nathan Gardels, Arianna Huffington, Eric Schmidt (Google Inc.), Pierre Omidyar (First Look Media) Juan Luis Cebrian (El Pais/PRISA), Walter Isaacson (Aspen Institute/TIME-CNN), John Elkann (Corriere della Sera, La Stampa), Wadah Khanfar (Al Jazeera), Dileep Padgaonkar (Times of India) and Yoichi Funabashi (Asahi Shimbun).

VICE PRESIDENT OF OPERATIONS: Dawn Nakagawa.

CONTRIBUTING EDITORS: Moises Naim (former editor of Foreign Policy), Nayan Chanda (Yale/Global; Far Eastern Economic Review) and Katherine Keating (One-On-One). Sergio Munoz Bata and Parag Khanna are Contributing Editors-At-Large.

The Asia Society and its ChinaFile, edited by Orville Schell, is our primary partner on Asia coverage. Eric X. Li and the Chunqiu Institute/Fudan University in Shanghai and Guancha.cn also provide first person voices from China. We also draw on the content of China Digital Times. Seung-yoon Lee is The WorldPost link in South Korea.

Jared Cohen of Google Ideas provides regular commentary from young thinkers, leaders and activists around the globe. Bruce Mau provides regular columns from MassiveChangeNetwork.com on the "whole mind" way of thinking. Patrick Soon-Shiong is Contributing Editor for Health and Medicine.

ADVISORY COUNCIL: Members of the Berggruen Institute's 21st Century Council and Council for the Future of Europe serve as the Advisory Council -- as well as regular contributors -- to the site. These include, Jacques Attali, Shaukat Aziz, Gordon Brown, Fernando Henrique Cardoso, Juan Luis Cebrian, Jack Dorsey, Mohamed El-Erian, Francis Fukuyama, Felipe Gonzalez, John Gray, Reid Hoffman, Fred Hu, Mo Ibrahim, Alexei Kudrin, Pascal Lamy, Kishore Mahbubani, Alain Minc, Dambisa Moyo, Laura Tyson, Elon Musk, Pierre Omidyar, Raghuram Rajan, Nouriel Roubini, Nicolas Sarkozy, Eric Schmidt, Gerhard Schroeder, Peter Schwartz, Amartya Sen, Jeff Skoll, Michael Spence, Joe Stiglitz, Larry Summers, Wu Jianmin, George Yeo, Fareed Zakaria, Ernesto Zedillo, Ahmed Zewail, and Zheng Bijian.

From the Europe group, these include: Marek Belka, Tony Blair, Jacques Delors, Niall Ferguson, Anthony Giddens, Otmar Issing, Mario Monti, Robert Mundell, Peter Sutherland and Guy Verhofstadt.

MISSION STATEMENT

The WorldPost is a global media bridge that seeks to connect the world and connect the dots. Gathering together top editors and first person contributors from all corners of the planet, we aspire to be the one publication where the whole world meets.

We not only deliver breaking news from the best sources with original reportage on the ground and user-generated content; we bring the best minds and most authoritative as well as fresh and new voices together to make sense of events from a global perspective looking around, not a national perspective looking out.

-- This feed and its contents are the property of The Huffington Post, and use is subject to our terms. It may be used for personal consumption, but may not be distributed on a website.

Finding the best credit card is part art, part science.

No single credit card is better than all others in all categories -- or for all people. But by understanding your options and asking the right questions, you can find the card that's the best fit for your spending habits and credit situation.

Follow these four steps to find the best credit card for you.

1. Check your credit

Find out what credit card offers you might be eligible for by checking your credit score. The better your score, the greater your chance of being approved for cards with better perks. Many credit card issuers give their cardholders free access to their FICO credit score, and several third-party sites provide different types of credit scores. You can also buy your score directly from the three major credit bureaus (Experian, Equifax and TransUnion).

If the number isn't what you expected, check your credit reports to see what's causing the problem. You can then start figuring out ways to improve it, from changing your spending habits to disputing an error on your reports, if you need to. Federal law entitles you to one free copy of your credit report from each of the three major bureaus every 12 months. Get your free reports at AnnualCreditReport.com, a federally authorized site.

2. Identify which type of credit card you need

There are three general types of credit cards:

Cards that help you improve your credit when it's limited or damaged.

Cards that save you money on interest.

Cards that earn rewards.

The best card for you is one with features designed to meet your specific needs. If you don't travel much, for example, then the best travel card in the world isn't going to do you a lot of good.

If you want to build or rebuild credit: Student or secured credit card

Student credit cards, unsecured cards meant for college students who are new to credit, are easier to qualify for than other types of credit cards. So are secured credit cards, which generally require a security deposit of $200 or more. Your deposit is returned to you when the account is upgraded or closed in good standing.

If you want to save on interest: Low-interest, 0% APR or balance transfer card

A card with an introductory 0% APR and ongoing low interest could be a good match for you if you plan to use your credit card in case of emergencies, or if you have an irregular income and carry a balance from time to time. A balance transfer offer could help you pay off a high-interest debt interest-free. Keep in mind that these offers may be harder to find if you have average or poor credit.

MORE: Find the best low-interest or 0% APR credit card with this flowchart.

If you want to earn rewards: Rewards, travel or cash back

A rewards credit card is a good match for you if you pay off your balance in full every month and never incur interest. These cards typically have higher APRs, but offer larger sign-up bonuses and give you points, miles or cash back on every dollar you spend.

MORE: Find the best rewards credit card with this flowchart.

3. Narrow your choices by asking the right questions

Visit NerdWallet's credit card comparison tool and search for the type of credit card you're looking for, filtering results according to your credit score and monthly spending. As you go through the top picks, consider these questions.

For student and secured cards:

Will this card help me build my credit? Look for a card that reports your credit card payments to the three major credit bureaus. Many secured cards don't do this.

How much does it cost to open an account, including the annual fee? The rewards on these cards generally aren't high enough to warrant an annual fee. Unless you have very poor credit, you can likely avoid this expense. For secured cards, the lower the security deposit, the better, although your credit limit may be tied directly to how much of a deposit you make.

Can I graduate to a better card later on? Choose a card that will let you build your credit and upgrade to a card with more competitive terms. This makes it easier to leave your card open longer, boosting your average age of accounts in the long run.

For low-interest, 0% APR or balance transfer cards:

How long is the 0% APR period, and what is the ongoing interest APR? Look for a card that gives you enough time to pay off your debt interest-free. If you're planning on carrying balances over several years, consider a credit card with a low ongoing APR.

What is the card's balance transfer policy? If you're doing a balance transfer, look up a card's balance transfer fees. Find out what types of debt you can transfer and whether there's a limit to how much you can move over. Note that the balance transfer APR on a card may be different from the purchase APR.

Does the card offer rewards? If you're looking for only a few months of 0% APR -- perhaps instead of a sign-up bonus -- you may be able to find a card that doles out generous ongoing rewards as well.

For rewards, travel or cash-back cards:

How do I spend my money? Look for a card that delivers the highest rewards for the categories you spend the most on. If you're a big spender, consider getting a card with an annual fee, if your rewards earnings would offset the cost. If you're planning to use the card abroad, look for one with no foreign transaction fees and chip-and-PIN capability, rather than the chip-and-signature technology that's standard in the U.S. This goes for other types of cards too.

How complicated is this credit card? If you don't want to contend with limited award seat availability, spending caps, rotating bonus rewards and loyalty tiers, consider a card with flat-rate cash-back rewards.

How quickly will I earn rewards, and how much are they worth? Read NerdWallet's rewards valuations to find the answers to these questions.

4. Apply for the card that offers you the highest overall value

Narrowing your choices is the easy part, but deciding between two or three similar cards can be quite difficult. If you've already found a clear winner after Step 3, go with that one. If not, it's time for a tiebreaker round.

Look closely for differences. All other values being equal, here are some factors that might set a card apart:

For student and secured cards:

Credit limit automatically increases. Certain cards let you increase your limit after a few consecutive on-time payments.

Interest paid on your deposit. Some secured cards place your security deposit in an interest-earning CD. This way, you can earn a small amount of money on it.

For low-interest, 0% APR or balance transfer cards:

Debt payoff planner. Some issuers let you create your own debt payoff plan on an online portal, a valuable tool if you're overwhelmed with debt.

No late fees or penalty APR. Certain cards waive these charges. If you fall behind on payments, this could come in handy.

For rewards, travel or cash-back cards:

Lower required spending. The less you need to spend to qualify for a sign-up bonus, the better.

No expiration date on rewards. On some cards, you can use your rewards as long as you keep the card open.

When you finally pick a card, keep in mind that, on the application, you can include all income you have reasonable access to, not just your personal income. For students, that can include money from grants and scholarships, or allowances from parents. For others, it may include a partner or spouse's income.

So you've found the best credit card. What's next?

Choosing the best credit card is an important decision, but don't stop there. Use your card the right way to get the most for your money. If you're trying to establish credit, pay your bill in full every month and don't use too much of your available credit. Stick to your debt payoff plan if you snagged a 0% APR deal. And if you're trying to rack up rewards, use your card for everyday purchases and pay your bill in full every month.

The credit card you choose should help you achieve your financial goals in the most affordable, efficient way possible, whether you're trying to build credit, borrow money or earn rewards. Don't settle for less.

Claire Tsosie is a staff writer at NerdWallet, a personal finance website. Email: claire@nerdwallet.com. Twitter: @ideclaire7.

-- This feed and its contents are the property of The Huffington Post, and use is subject to our terms. It may be used for personal consumption, but may not be distributed on a website.

No one ever became a great leader without first becoming a great communicator.

2015-07-27-1438024930-3533255-10CommunicationSecretsofGreatLeadersHP.jpg

Great leaders connect with people on an emotional level every time they speak. Their words inspire others to achieve more than they ever thought possible.

Great communicators are intentional about it, and there are 10 secrets they rely on to deliver a powerful message. Put these secrets to work in your communication and watch your influence soar.

1. They Know Their Audience

Great communicators don't worry about sounding important, showing off their expertise, or boosting their own egos. Instead, they think about what people need to hear, and how they can deliver this message so that people will be able to hear it. This doesn't mean that leaders tell people what they want to hear. Quite the opposite--they tell people what's important for them to know, even if it's bad news.

2. They Are Experts In Body Language

Great communicators are constantly tracking people's reactions to their message. They are quick to pick up on cues like facial expressions and body language because they know this is the only feedback many people will give them. Great communicators use this expertise to tailor their message on the fly and adjust their communication style as needed.

3. They Are Honest

The best leaders know that for communication to be effective it has to be real. They can't have people parsing every word trying to separate fact from spin. When great communicators can't share certain information, they come right out and say it because makeshift, half-truth answers breed distrust and anxiety. In good times and bad, honesty builds trust.

4. They Are Authentic

Great communicators don't try to be someone they're not just because they've stepped behind a podium. There's a reason Mark Zuckerberg presented Facebook to investors in a hoodie and jeans. Great leaders know that when they stay true to who they are, people gravitate to their message. They also know the opposite happens when leaders put on an act.

5. They Speak With Authority

Great communicators don't try to cover their backs by being ambiguous, wishy-washy, or unassertive. Instead, they stick their necks out and speak very directly about how things are and how they need to be.

6. They Speak To Groups As Individuals

Leaders rarely have the luxury of speaking to one person at a time. Whether it's a huddle around a conference table or an overflowing auditorium, great leaders know how to work the room and make every single person feel as if he or she is being spoken to directly.

7. They Have Ears (And They Use Them)

Great leaders know that communication is a two-way street and what they hear is often more important than what they say. When someone else is speaking, great communicators aren't thinking ahead and planning what they'll say next. Instead, they're actively listening, fully focused on understanding the other person's perspective.

8. They Use Phrases Like "It's My Fault," "I Was Wrong," and "I'm Sorry"

When great leaders make a mistake, they admit it right away. They don't wait for someone else to find and point out their blunder. They model accountability for their words and actions, even when they could have easily "gotten away" with the mistake. And they do it matter-of-factly, without drama or false humility.

9. They Solicit Feedback

The best communicators never assume that the message people heard is the exact same one they intended to deliver. They check in to verify that their message was understood correctly, and, if it was not, they don't blame the audience. Instead, they change things up and try again.

10. They're Proactive

Leaders with the best communication skills don't waste time playing catch-up. They're quick to head off the rumor mill by sharing bad news in a timely manner. They also give clear, concise goals and directions so people don't waste their time heading in the wrong direction.

Bringing It All Together

Great communicators stand out from the crowd. They're honest. They're authentic. They listen. They excel in communication because they value it, and that's the critical first step to becoming a great leader.

What other strategies make for great communication? Please share your thoughts on leadership and communication in the comments section below, as I learn just as much from you as you do from me.

-- This feed and its contents are the property of The Huffington Post, and use is subject to our terms. It may be used for personal consumption, but may not be distributed on a website.

It's truly fascinating how successful people approach problems. Where others see impenetrable barriers, they see challenges to embrace and obstacles to overcome.

2015-07-27-1438025443-7545781-7ChallengesSuccessfulPeopleOvercomeHP.jpg

Their confidence in the face of hardship is driven by the ability to let go of the negativity that holds so many otherwise sensible people back.

Martin Seligman at the University of Pennsylvania has studied this phenomenon more than anyone else has, and he's found that success in life is driven by one critical distinction--whether you believe that your failures are produced by personal deficits beyond your control or that they are mistakes you can fix with effort.

Success isn't the only thing determined by your mindset. Seligman has found much higher rates of depression in people who attribute their failures to personal deficits. Optimists fare better; they treat failure as learning experiences and believe they can do better in the future.

This success mindset requires emotional intelligence (EQ), and it's no wonder that, among the million-plus people that TalentSmart has tested, 90% of top performers have high EQs.

Maintaining the success mindset isn't easy. There are seven things, in particular, that tend to shatter it. These challenges drag people down because they appear to be barriers that cannot be overcome. Not so for successful people, as these seven challenges never hold them back.

1. Age

Age really is just a number. Successful people don't let their age define who they are and what they are capable of. Just ask Betty White or any young, thriving entrepreneur.

I remember a professor in graduate school who told our class that we were all too young and inexperienced to do consulting work. He said we had to go work for another company for several years before we could hope to succeed as independent consultants. I was the youngest person in the class, and I sat there doing work for my consulting clients while he droned on.

Without fail, people feel compelled to tell you what you should and shouldn't do because of your age. Don't listen to them. Successful people certainly don't. They follow their heart and allow their passion--not the body they're living in--to be their guide.

"They follow their heart and allow their passion--not the body they're living in--to be their guide."

2. What Other People Think

When your sense of pleasure and satisfaction are derived from comparing yourself to others, you are no longer the master of your own destiny. While it's impossible to turn off your reactions to what others think of you, you don't have to hold up your accomplishments to anyone else's, and you can always take people's opinions with a grain of salt. That way, no matter what other people are thinking or doing, your self-worth comes from within.

Successful people know that caring about what other people think is a waste of time and energy. When successful people feel good about something that they've done, they don't let anyone's opinions take that away from them.

"No matter what other people think of you at any particular moment, one thing is certain--you're never as good or bad as they say you are."

3. Toxic People

Successful people believe in a simple notion: you are the average of the five people you spend the most time with.

Just think about it--some of the most successful companies in recent history were founded by brilliant pairs. Steve Jobs and Steve Wozniak of Apple lived in the same neighborhood, Bill Gates and Paul Allen of Microsoft met in prep school, and Sergey Brin and Larry Page of Google met at Stanford.

Just as great people help you to reach your full potential, toxic people drag you right down with them. Whether it's negativity, cruelty, the victim syndrome, or just plain craziness, toxic people create stress and strife that should be avoided at all costs.

If you're unhappy with where you are in your life, just take a look around. More often than not, the people you've surrounded yourself with are the root of your problems.

"You'll never reach your peak until you surround yourself with the right people."

4. Fear

Fear is nothing more than a lingering emotion that's fueled by your imagination. Danger is real. It's the uncomfortable rush of adrenaline you get when you almost step in front of a bus. Fear is a choice. Successful people know this better than anyone does, so they flip fear on its head. They are addicted to the euphoric feeling they get from conquering their fears.

Don't ever hold back in life just because you feel scared. I often hear people say, "What's the worst thing that can happen to you? Will it kill you?" Yet, death isn't the worst thing that can happen to you...

"The worst thing that can happen to you is allowing yourself to die inside while you're still alive."

5. Negativity

Life won't always go the way you want it to, but when it comes down to it, you have the same 24 hours in the day as everyone else does. Successful people make their time count. Instead of complaining about how things could have been or should have been, they reflect on everything they have to be grateful for. Then they find the best solution available, tackle the problem, and move on.

When the negativity comes from someone else, successful people avoid it by setting limits and distancing themselves from it. Think of it this way:

"If the complainer were smoking, would you sit there all afternoon inhaling the second-hand smoke?"

Of course not. You'd distance yourself, and you should do the same with all negative people.

A great way to stop complainers in their tracks is to ask them how they intend to fix the problem they're complaining about. They will either quiet down or redirect the conversation in a productive direction.

6. The Past or the Future

Like fear, the past and the future are products of your mind. No amount of guilt can change the past, and no amount of anxiety can change the future. Successful people know this, and they focus on living in the present moment. It's impossible to reach your full potential if you're constantly somewhere else, unable to fully embrace the reality (good or bad) of this very moment.

To live in the moment, you must do two things:

1) Accept your past. If you don't make peace with your past, it will never leave you and it will create your future. Successful people know the only good time to look at the past is to see how far you've come.

2) Accept the uncertainty of the future, and don't place unnecessary expectations upon yourself. Worry has no place in the here and now. As Mark Twain once said,

"Worrying is like paying a debt you don't owe."

7. The State of the World

Keep your eyes on the news for any length of time and you'll see it's just one endless cycle of war, violent attacks, fragile economies, failing companies, and environmental disasters. It's easy to think the world is headed downhill fast.

And who knows? Maybe it is. But successful people don't worry about that because they don't get caught up in things they can't control. Instead, they focus their energy on directing the two things that are completely within their power--their attention and their effort. They focus their attention on all the things they're grateful for, and they look for the good that's happening in the world. They focus their effort on doing what they can every single day to improve their own lives and the world around them, because these small steps are all it takes to make the world a better place.

"They focus their effort on doing what they can every single day to improve their own lives and the world around them..."

Bringing It All Together

Your success is driven by your mindset. With discipline and focus, you can ensure that these seven obstacles never hold you back from reaching your full potential.

What other challenges do successful people overcome? Please share your thoughts in the comments section below as I learn just as much from you as you do from me.

-- This feed and its contents are the property of The Huffington Post, and use is subject to our terms. It may be used for personal consumption, but may not be distributed on a website.

For many years, U.S. Savings Bonds were an attractive, simple way for Americans to save money for the future or to provide meaningful gifts to grandchildren. Not any more. Older Series EE bonds had a high "floor" interest rate and an additional variable rate that changed every six months. In 2005, that formula was discontinued. Now EE bonds carry a fixed rate for the first 20 years, set at the time of purchase. Locking in today's low rates makes them quite unattractive for new purchases.

But, deciding how and when to cash older Series EE bonds has become an art form. And few experts are as knowledgeable as Jackie Brahney of SavingsBonds.com, a website that is dedicated to helping investors understand their savings bond values. The website offers a free savings bond calculator and color coded inventory form, secured with a password. For a membership fee of less than $1 per month, you can also get a monthly update by email, plus a "cash-in" report, helping you decide which bonds to cash first and the optimal time to cash them.

Here are five basic things you should know:

--When should I cash my savings bonds? Older, paper savings bonds reach "original maturity" when they reach their face value -- the amount written on the bond. Because of the variable interest rates on them, there is no fixed date for that to happen. They will continue earning interest until they reach "final maturity" -- 30 years from the issue date for all EE bonds.

--What's the tax implication of cashing a savings bond? Unless you elected to pay taxes on the interest on an annual basis, which few people do, you must pay federal income tax on the bonds in the year they mature -- even if you don't cash them in. (And if you cash them in early, you'll pay taxes that year.) There is no state or local income tax on U.S. Savings bonds.

Warning: Cashing in a lot of bonds in one year could result in enough interest income to put you in a higher tax bracket or push seniors into paying more for Medicare Part B. Also, for bonds purchased after 1989 in parents' names, there may be some tax advantages if the proceeds are used to pay college costs, depending on the family income and other requirements.

--How do I choose which bonds to cash in? That depends on the bond. Some older EE bonds that have not reached final maturity yet had a guaranteed rate as high as 8 percent for the original maturity period, and still may pay a higher semi-annual rate than current low yields. That's why it's important to have Savings Bond Inventory and "cash-in" report as offered by SavingsBonds.com. Also, despite low current fixed rates, all EE bonds issued since May 2005 are guaranteed to double in value in 20 years, with a value adjustment made at that point.

Note: Cashing in bonds just one day before interest is posted will cost you all the interest for that period (either one or six months, depending on the bond). And cashing them within five years of purchase will create a three-month interest penalty.

--How do I cash in savings bonds? If you have paper bonds, you can bring them to a financial institution. But you should run a savings bond valuation report before doing so, to make sure you are receiving the correct amount! You can cash electronic bonds early at TreasuryDirect.gov, but they must be held at least one year before they can be cashed.

--Can I give my bonds to my children to avoid taxes on the interest? Removing the primary owner (which can only be done before final maturity) usually creates a taxable event. The original owner is responsible for reporting all interest earned up to that point.

Yes, cashing in savings bonds is not as simple as just going to the bank. If you want to get the most out of your investment, do your homework before getting rid of old savings bonds. They could be more valuable than you think. That's the Savage Truth.

-- This feed and its contents are the property of The Huffington Post, and use is subject to our terms. It may be used for personal consumption, but may not be distributed on a website.

Over the last few years a lot has been written about making jobs "purposeful."

Reid Hoffman just posted an article about the importance of purpose, and described how LinkedIn creates purpose. Earlier this year the New York Times described how Mark Bertolini, the CEO of Aetna, has applied purpose to their workforce. And my own research with Glassdoor shows clearly that "culture and values" are the most highly correlated factors in someone's likelihood of recommending their company as a great place to work.

Fig 1: Correlation of "company ratings" to various factors in Glassdoor, n=200,000, August 2015

But as much as I have been a huge fan of building a "purposeful culture" and communicating values and mission in the workplace, some new research by a research firm named Imperative actually shows us something different:

Purpose Comes from Within

I spoke with Aaron Hurst, the CEO of Imperative a few weeks ago, and he educated me about an existential truth. There are essentially two reasons people choose to work:

Reason 1: Work for financial gain or personal status. (not "purposeful")

Reason 2: Work to help others, contribute, or for personal fulfillment ("purposeful").

Their research shows that everyone in every profession falls into one of these categories. You can be a "purposeful" software engineer (do it for the love of it), or you can be an "unpurposeful" software engineer (do it for the money).

Imperative's research points out some pretty amazing statistics. Those of us who are "purposeful" at work are much higher performers. Specifically, these lucky folks are:

55% more likely than average to rise to Director-level roles

39% more likely to rise to VP or C-level positions

50% more likely to be in the top position

Significantly more likely to be net promoters of their organizations, stay longer, have stronger relationships, report higher levels of fulfillment, and get higher performance scores.

And as Imperative's research shows, being "purpose oriented" is not about the work, it's about YOU.

Fig 2: From Imperative Workforce Purpose Index study

What the Imperative research shows, which I found to be quite profound as I thought about it, is that we are all in control of how we perceive our work.

If we were brought up in a family where the breadwinner came home each night tired and unhappy and sat on the couch drinking beer and complaining, we are likely to see work as drudgery and just a way to get a paycheck. On the other hand, if your father or mother came home excited about work and talked openly about how much fun and excitement they were having (which my father did every day), then we look at work as a place to find self-fulfillment.

Think about this. You have the power to make your work more meaningful! (It may mean quitting and changing jobs of course, but remember - much of happiness is based on the stories we tell ourselves in our own head.)

Now here's the unfortunate news.

Only 28% of the US workforce is
"Purpose-driven"

Imperative's research, sadly, found that only about 1/4 of us are in the lucky position to find work meaningful.

This, to me, is incredibly sad. And there are trends here:

Only 20% of tech workers are "purpose oriented"

Women and people over 55 are much more likely to be "purpose oriented." In fact the older you get, the more purpose-oriented you become.

Only 50% of CEO's are "purpose oriented." (Probably the ones who take time and energy to focus on their people.) And only 39% of VP's are. (They're striving to get ahead I'd imagine.)

Purpose oriented people have much deeper relationships at work (69% vs. 45%) - which tells us that "connecting with people at work" might be one of the keys here.

Artists are by far the most purpose-oriented (almost 2X higher than the average), followed by professionals. Laborers and hourly workers are the lowest, as you might imagine. But service workers are above average in purpose-orientation!

By industry, education, forestry, non-profit, and healthcare organizations tend to have more purpose-oriented workers - but as you can see, they're still mostly filled with non-purpose oriented people!

Fig 3: Purpose-Orientation by Industry, Imperative study

So What Does This All Mean

For me, after spending almost two decades studying work and talent practices, I take away a few profound findings:

1. If you're an employer, you should seek out people who "want to do the job you're hiring for" - people who love it for its own sake, people who love your company's mission, and people who genuinely like to help others. These people are relatively easy to spot, and while they may not be the most "ambitious" (many are), these are clues you can spot. (We have always had people like this apply to work at Bersin.)

2. If you're and HR manager or business leader, you should work hard to create jobs that can offer meaning to people. Give people autonomy and freedom to create and innovate; give them flexibility to work the way they want; thank them regularly for their efforts; and give them a clear mission and view of the organization's goals so they can find their own purpose at work.

(You can read more about how to build a "Simply Irresistible" workplace in my article explaining the new world of employee engagement here.)

3. If you're a recruiter or hiring manager, remember to ask people "why are you applying for this job?" This simple question will tell you about someone's purpose-orientation, and give you a clue as to how well they will adapt, grow, and contribute to your organization.

4. If you are a job seeker (and aren't we all?), take some time to rethink your own motivation. What do you really want to get out of work? How do you define your own measure of "success"? Can you think more about your impact on others and less about your personal gain? Are there tasks, jobs, organizations that really excite you that you can look for?

The bottom line message is pretty simple. We all spend 50-70% of our working hours in some kind of trade, job, or profession. If we don't really like it, it's up to us to change. We may need to change what we do, change the team we're on, or change the company we're in. Or we may need to change our own attitude.

Every individual at work deserves an opportunity to find purpose. I'd challenge you - for yourself and the others around you - to look for purpose in a serious and deliberate way. It will make you happier, healthier, and more successful in all areas of your life.

-- This feed and its contents are the property of The Huffington Post, and use is subject to our terms. It may be used for personal consumption, but may not be distributed on a website.

PARIS -- One wonders why it has taken so long for France to understand that the unification of a world without the rule of law could only lead to the spread of chaos. Yet, every year the chaos is more and more visible. It has settled gradually, inexorably, planetarily and now spectacularly and loudly on many fronts -- economic, social, ecological, political, military, ideological.

In such a world, autarkic, national solutions make less and less sense. Do we imagine France alone can now engage this battle that erupted on its streets on Nov. 13, and less than a year ago in the attacks on Charlie Hebdo?

As long as we do not create the conditions for an alliance of all the forces of good, across the planet, against those of evil, the disorder can only grow and the worst violence will increase in our streets, committed by the victims of chaos elsewhere.

There are thousands of definitions in history of good and evil. Today, the evil is terrorism, wherever it comes from. Facing that evil, the "good" must be defined in a modest way: bringing together all those opposed to evil, even if we have much to otherwise criticize in our chosen allies.

To achieve this, we urgently need to apply a number of simple principles which are long overdue but have not been practiced due to weakness, naivety, ignorance, cowardice and procrastination in the face of the mounting facts.

First, we need to stop opposing Russia, Iran and even Syria, even though we do not approve of their behavior, because we are objective allies in this conflict. Then we need to unite the forces of all these countries in this common struggle just as the forces of civilization coalesced in World War II. Without Stalin, Roosevelt and Churchill never would have won the war against Hitler.

Further, NATO today must be transformed to fight the distributed nature of today's terrorism and not another Cold War. It needs to gather together all the enemies of our enemies to face the new threats. And Europe, more than ever, needs to develop a strong arm in its defense capacity.

Finally, and most importantly, we must realize that this battle will not be won only by professionals, as necessary as they are, but by the mobilization of the entire people in defense of our values. And for that, it is still necessary that those values are taught in school so that our citizens want to fight for them. In this new battle, we need to restore military service as a permanent citizen mobilization so there is a widespread capacity for civic defense.

Above all, we need the practice in France of a clear, coherent discourse, explaining what we believe and why. It should not be up to the president of the United States to always offer inspiring words after some disaster.

Starting today, maybe we'll finally decide to review everything in the light of this battle which will determine everything else going forward.

As we should have done a long time ago, we need now to rethink our defense budget, police and education system and how it all fits together in these fraught times. This "rethink" should condition the next regional elections and shape the policies of candidates for the next presidential election. In particular, it should determine our foreign policy and our European policy.

But we need to hurry up. The nightmare of Nov. 13 shows us the costs of time already lost.

Also on WorldPost:

-- This feed and its contents are the property of The Huffington Post, and use is subject to our terms. It may be used for personal consumption, but may not be distributed on a website.

They used to be between tribes. Or city-states. Or one empire against another. Or between countries. Today, who wages war?

The Islamic State has declared war on countries, on religions and on sects. As well as on groups like Al Qaeda, Hamas, Hezbollah and the Taliban. But what is the Islamic State? Despite its efforts to appear as a state and fulfill some of the functions that are usually carried out by governments, ISIS -- or Daesh -- is not a state but rather a hard-to-categorize non-governmental, militarized, Islamist terrorist organization that is essentially stateless.

And therein lies a problem. In reaction to the Paris massacre, French President François Hollande said, "[This] is an act of war ... committed by a terrorist army."

Acts of war used to be the monopoly of nation-states. Obviously, that is no longer the case. The terrorists used to be called "bands" or "groups." Not anymore. And President Barack Obama has said that the terrorism in Paris was "an attack not just on the people of France, but ... an attack on all of humanity and the universal values that we share." From this perspective, in Paris what was attacked was not a nation-state and its citizens but a set of beliefs and principles. Obviously, we need a new language to understand what is happening.

Acts of war used to be the monopoly of nation-states. Obviously, that is no longer the case.

And more than a decade after the terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001 in the United States, the prevailing ideas about the nature of the threat, its causes and the best ways to combat this threat are confusing and the source of heated and inconclusive debates.

But there is more. This new century not only brought us new forms of armed conflict and combatants, but also transformed the most frequently used weapons responsible for the largest number of casualties and the most damage. Homemade explosives, drones or unmanned flying vehicles, cyber wars and suicide bombers are the most disruptive, common and deadly weapons in today's conflicts.

Of course, the use of suicide bombers is not new. In World War II, for example, 3,860 Japanese military pilots, the famous Kamikaze, each committed suicide trying to crash his plane into an enemy ship (only 19 percent succeeded). In contrast, between 1982 and June of this year there were 4,620 suicide attacks that claimed 45,000 lives. To this sad number we must now add the victims of the recent slaughter in Paris -- and others elsewhere.

Another weapon that is used with increasing frequency and has, therefore, had an enormously disruptive impact are improvised explosive devices which are homemade bombs usually placed near a heavily trafficked location and exploded remotely with a cell phone or even a garage door opener. These are basically artisanal land mines. And land mines are weapons of war that have long been part of military arsenals everywhere. But while in the Second World War land mines caused 5 percent of U.S. military fatalities, in the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan they were responsible for the overwhelming majority of casualties. Lately, these IEDs are not only used while buried under a road and waiting for a passing car or a platoon of soldiers to explode by remote control signals. Strapped to the body of a suicide bomber, these artisanal bombs become a devastating and effective weapon, as we saw in the Paris attacks.

A new weapon that is also changing the nature of war in the 21st century war are the drones, unmanned aircraft guided by remote control. Most of the leaders of Al Qaeda, the Taliban and the Islamic State have been killed by missiles launched by unmanned drones. While currently the most common users of armed drones tend to be the technologically advanced militaries of the world -- and especially the U.S. -- it is only a matter of time before terrorist groups start using armed drones. Sadly, the combination of improvised explosive devices and drones offers a powerful new weapon for terrorists.

Homemade explosives, drones or unmanned flying vehicles, cyber wars and suicide bombers are the most disruptive, common and deadly weapons in today's conflicts.

Finally, cyberwar. Today, almost all of the world's armed forces have individuals and assets dedicated exclusively to defending their nation against cyberattacks and to spying on and cyber-attacking other nations. Terrorist groups have also learned to use the Internet to coordinate, finance their operations, recruit members globally and launch effective propaganda campaigns.

What do these four types of weapons that are disrupting war have in common? That they are no longer the monopoly of the military and their governments. In the past, the most important and lethal weapons were under the control of professional armed forces and the governments of their countries. Not anymore. You can buy a drone online and also get instructions on the Internet to make a homemade explosive. And if you can do this, so can the terrorists. In addition, some terrorist groups have access to people willing to commit suicide, an option that is not available to the armies of contemporary democracies.

Wars are no longer the business of governments alone. Like what is happening in so many other realms of human activity from hailing a taxi or booking a room to spend the night -- war is being disrupted by groups and individuals that combine technologies, new strategies and new forms of organization to drastically alter its nature.

Does this mean that terrorists have advantages that guarantee their victory in the long run? Of course not. But stopping them and ensuring that events like those we saw in Paris are not repeated, does require radical changes in the way democracies think about war, fighters, weapons, intelligence and espionage. We need to disrupt the disrupters.

Also on WorldPost:

-- This feed and its contents are the property of The Huffington Post, and use is subject to our terms. It may be used for personal consumption, but may not be distributed on a website.

ISIS, with its horrific attack on purely civilian targets in Paris, has established new realities about its nature, capabilities and intentions. The need for its elimination can now no longer be in doubt. It is not that Parisian lives are more important than others, but Paris changes the game.

ISIS has proven to be a serial game changer over the past 18 months since it first came to significant public attention in establishing its so called "Islamic State" athwart the desert border regions of Syria and Iraq. Its hideously choreographed media events and grisly executions were specifically designed to create shock and awe. But it operated locally.

It has now overturned the analyses of most observers, including myself, who tended to view it as primarily regionally and territorially-focused, intent on (non-viable) state-building, Caliphate formation, targeting regional enemies rather than operating on a broader world stage. Now recent bombings in Beirut, the destruction of a Russian airliner midair and the vicious attacks in Paris have now raised level of threat to new heights.

There would be no ISIS today if the U.S. had not invaded and destroyed Iraq's leadership, government, ruling institutions, elites, army, infrastructure and social order.

What is yet unclear is how much the Paris action was the brainchild of a centralized command structure operating out of the ISIS capital in Syria, or an action by local "franchise" organizations or "wild cat" operations inspired by ISIS to act locally.

Whatever the case, these series of events now call out for broader and deeper international action. ISIS must be eliminated.

I reach this view with much mixed feeling. Over the years I have grown increasingly convinced that western military interventions and wars to "fix" the Middle East have not only failed, but have vastly exacerbated nearly all regional situations. Washington has at the end of the day, in effect, "lost" every one of its recent wars in Afghanistan, Iraq, Yemen and elsewhere. The West has been as much the problem as the solution.

ISIS is the single deepest source of immediate Middle East strategic disorder, with global implications.

We must remember that there would be no ISIS today if the U.S. had not invaded and destroyed Iraq's leadership, government, ruling institutions, elites, army, infrastructure and social order.

We must remember that history in the Middle East did not begin with 9/11. Rather 9/11 was already the culmination of years of previous western policies of interventions and political manipulations.

We cannot proceed to take more vigorous "action" now without having these two propositions engraved on our foreheads. But some action must now be taken -- even though nothing in our past actions offers much ground for reassurance.

But by now ISIS is the single deepest source of immediate Middle East strategic disorder, with global implications. Not Iraq, not Iran, not Syria, not Libya, not Yemen, not Lebanon, not Somalia -- or any of those other "optional wars" launched by Washington and its allies -- ever presented the same deeply destabilizing global potential as does ISIS today.

islamic state flag

Syrian gov't forces walk past building with image reading 'Islamic State' on eastern outskirts of Aleppo after taking village from ISIS. (GEORGE OURFALIAN/AFP/Getty Images)

-- ISIS promotes and perpetuates the narrative of "Islam versus the West" -- a heroic and ungrounded myth -- although it is bait to which many in the West regularly rise.

-- ISIS implements savage sectarian division, an ideology promoted chiefly by Saudi Arabia, that now spills over into conflicts in Yemen, Bahrain, Iraq, Syria and elsewhere. It is not inherently the fundamental problem of the Middle East -- unless it is made to be so.

-- ISIS is not a real state, despite its aspirations; it never will be a viable state, and must not be treated as one.

-- ISIS now demonstrates both the intent and the ability to extend its violence, its "retribution," well outside its desert arena.

-- ISIS distracts from and radicalizes all other state-to-state regional problems.

-- ISIS operations whip up Islamophobia and threaten the security of Muslims living outside the Middle East.

If ever there was a case for genuine, I repeat, genuine international action in the Middle East, this is it. But if Washington or Riyadh continue to interpret Syria primarily as a proxy battleground against Iran, or against Russia, then genuine international action will surely fail; agreement on Syria's end state will never be achieved.

The elimination of ISIS requires every significant stake-holder to be present: U.N., U.S., EU, Canada, Russia, Iran, Kurds, Saudi Arabia, Turkey, Iraq, Qatar, Egypt and others. China, aspiring to a major world role, cannot sit this one out either. This convocation requires real heft and clout to impose some rough plan of action. Above all, the U.N. must head up future operations involving the indispensable future ground operations. If ever an neutral face was essential, this is it.

If ever there was a case for genuine, I repeat, genuine international action in the Middle East, this is it.

The essential goal is the destruction of ISIS as an organization possessing territory, infrastructure, command structure, and administrative control. But it is not a genuine state, either territorially, ethnically, geopolitically, economically, historically, even religiously. It may be turning to international terrorism -- as did Al Qaeda -- as it sees its future on the ground fading.

The present territory held by ISIS must revert to the state on whose territory it has operated. Yes, that means, for now, Syria's Assad regime.

Over many decades Assad's Syria was simply one more unpleasant regional state, but far from the worst. Even then, however, the U.S. always sought to covertly overthrow him. But Assad took on his truly vicious and ruthless character in his reactions to the domestic uprisings against him beginning in the Arab Spring in 2011. Yet even today Syrians are divided over who represents the greater threat, Assad or his enemies. Whatever the discussion, by now the blood on Assad's hands symbolically demand early forfeiture of his leadership -- the details of transition to be negotiated.

The essential goal is the destruction of ISIS as an organization possessing territory, infrastructure, command structure, and administrative control.

Ironically the enormity of the ISIS/ Al Qaeda alternative to Assad had lately sparked some western hesitation in pursuing his overthrow, but now, through its massacres in Paris, ISIS may now have dealt Assad the death blow. Because only a genuine and convincing coalition with overwhelming authority will have the clout to eliminate ISIS and to tell Assad that he personally is finished, that some kind of international supervision is required to bring about a new order in Syria.

That new order will inevitably create regional winners and losers which will immensely complicate the creation of any international consensus. But given the rising challenge and chaos some hierarchy of goals can gradually be hammered out.

-- First, ISIS must be eliminated as a territorial entity.

-- The U.N. must maintain the operational and legal leadership of the operation -- not the U.S., or "the West" or NATO that spark volatile reaction.

-- Disarm militias and restore order. Order is the bedrock of any further progress.

-- The Syrian state itself must not be dismantled á la Washington's folly in occupied Iraq -- whose disastrous repercussions are still with us. No de-Ba'thification of Syria as a program.

-- Establish the framework for gradual national elections. Yes, Iran, this means that minority Alawi rule over the country will not survive national elections; regional authorities could be created and the Alawis and others could administer their own regions. Anyway, Iranian-Syrian relations have always rested on far more than these dubious sectarian ties.

Are there problems and complications with this scenario? Of course. I myself can think of as many problems in this scheme right now as any other reader. There's much more to be said. But we have to start somewhere. A Rubicon has been crossed.

Earlier on WorldPost:

-- This feed and its contents are the property of The Huffington Post, and use is subject to our terms. It may be used for personal consumption, but may not be distributed on a website.

Washington’s capacity to foster crony capitalist larceny and corruption never ceases to amaze. But according to the Bloomberg story below, Wall Street’s shameless thievery from US taxpayers is about to get a whole new definition.

To wit, Freddie Mac is handing three private equity billionaires deeply subsidized debt financing in order to undertake $18 billion in rental apartment deals. According to no less an authority than Morgan Stanley, the subsidy embedded in this cheap financing amounts to 150 basis points or roughly $150 million per year on the loan amounts in play.

Yet this largesse will serve no discernible public purpose whatsoever. Indeed, over the 10-year term of these loans the bonanza will amount to billions, but it will not generate a single new unit of housing. Nor will it provide a single dollar of incremental rent relief to any low or moderate income tenant.

That’s because the purpose of these giant loans is not to fund new construction of rental housing—– for which there is currently an arguable shortage. And it’s not even to incentivize owners to convert existing apartment buildings to so-called “affordable” housing.

Instead, its sole effect will be to put the taxpayers in the business of highly leveraged Wall Street deal making. That is, it will fund what amounts to apartment company LBOs being undertaken by the largest players in the private equity world including Barry Sternlicht's Starwood Capital Group, Steve Schwarzman's Blackstone Group and John Grayken’s Lone Star Fund.

Each of these cats are billionaires many times over and their remit most definitely does not include bolstering the social safety net. What they are doing is buying giant apartment companies in high priced takeover deals. These LBOs will shower sellers and speculators with windfall gains, and Wall Street dealers and themselves with prodigious fees now and the prospect of pocketing double, triple or quadruple their modest cash equity investments not too far down the road.

Freddie Mac, of course, is the one and same crony capitalist monstrosity that helped push the US financial system to the brink in 2008. If Washington had any common sense and gumption at all, it would have taken it out back and shot it years ago.

But the K-Street lobbies kept it alive during the dark days after the crash and have now invented a new mission to purportedly facilitate affordable rental housing. But that’s a crock, and the true purpose could not be more blatantly obvious than in the three deals described in the Bloomberg article.

Thus, Freddie Mac will loan the Lone Star Fund $5 billion to finance an LBO of Home Properties. Folks, the latter is a rental housing REIT that is publicly traded, more than adequately financed and in no need of help from the nation’s taxpayers whatsoever. In fact, it already has about $2.4 billion of plain old market debt.

But it can be well and truly said that the punters and hedge funds which own the stock have made out like bandits. Its share price has tripled since the March 2009 bottom, but more importantly, was up by 35% just in the 18-months prior to the June 2015 LBO announcement.

HME data by YCharts

Did Home Properties earnings take-off in the last year or so, thereby warranting the stock price surge shown above?

No they didn’t. During the 12-months ended in June 2015, Home Properties earned $177 million or 4% less than the $185 million of net income it posted two years earlier for the June 2013 LTM.

So here is what was accomplished by putting US taxpayers in harms’ way in this instance.

A rental housing REIT with more than 100 communities and 40,000 apartment units, and which currently is comprised of about 30% “affordable” units under Freddie Mac’s elastic definitions, has been shuffled from public to private ownership.

The transaction was accomplished at the bubble era price of 25X net income—–a vastly inflated valuation which had been reached in June and which reflected the fact that the fast money boys had earlier piled on for the rumored takeover ride.

Yet without Freddie Mac’s funding of the takeout at this absurdly inflated price, the arbs and speculators who sold their stock into the recently completed deal would not have had a snowball’s chance of retaining their winnings.

That’s some public policy accomplishment, and its all there is.

Its proud new billionaire owner won’t be required to add a single additional unit of so-called “affordable” housing, and that term doesn’t mean much anyway. Freddie Mac’s definition includes about 60% of US households!

Well, there is one aspect which has changed, and not in a good way. What was a public REIT with $4.4 billion of equity market cap and $2.4 billion of debt has become a private LBO with $5 billion of debt and a deal fee tab in the order of $300 million.

As to the latter, it was some kind of Wall Street feast. Yet all of the deal commotion implied by this listing amounted to dead weight cost to society. This pointless LBO deal never would have happened on the free market:

BofA Merrill Lynch acted as financial advisor to Home Properties. BofA Merrill Lynch and Houlihan Lokey provided fairness opinions to the Home Properties Board of Directors in connection with the transaction. Goldman, Sachs & Co. acted as exclusive financial advisor to Lone Star. Hogan Lovells US LLP acted as legal advisor to Home Properties. Gibson, Dunn & Crutcher LLP acted as corporate legal advisor, Hunton & Williams LLP acted as real estate legal advisor, and Skadden, Arps, Slate, Meagher & Flom LLP acted as tax legal advisors to Lone Star Funds. Sidley Austin LLP acted as legal advisor to BofA Merrill Lynch, and Cleary Gottlieb Steen& Hamilton LLP acted as legal advisor to Goldman, Sachs & Co.

In other words, the fools in Washington have descended so far down the rabbit hole of “help for housing” that they have managed to double the debt on these 40,000 rental units in order to cash out public equity investors who had no claim whatsoever to taxpayer support. Oh, yes, and to pay enormous fees to the deal banker, Goldman Sachs, which by all rights should be paying back taxpayers for its 2008 bailout, not scalping them yet again.

But when it comes to lunacy in the rabbit hole nothing comes close to another deal mentioned in the article—— the $5.3 billion LBO of Stuyvesant Town-Peter Cooper Village by Blackstone. It appears that Freddie Mac will provide $2.5 billion of the takeover financing, meaning the annual subsidy will be in the order of $40 million.

Let’s be clear about “Stuy Town” as its called. It has absolutely nothing to do with poor people or any plausible notion of a social safety net. It is a monster housing complex on the lower east side of New York which encompasses 80 acres, 11,000 apartment units and upwards of 35,000 middle class inhabitants—–a good sized city in most of America.

It also happens to be ground zero for one of the more spectacular housing debt crashes last time around. It had been a $5.4 billion leveraged buyout in 2006 by Tishman Speyer and a BlackRock fund. The deal predicate was that this legendary rent-controlled complex originally built by MetLife for returning servicemen after WWII would slowly return to free market pricing as grandfathered tenants passed away or moved on.

But the Greenspan credit bubble expired before the rent-protected tenants did or before mysteriously failing heating, plumbing and electrical services could induce enough of the remaining rent-protected tenants to move along on their own two feet in order to make the pro forma financials work.

Not surprisingly, the deal blew sky high during the financial crisis and resulted in billions of losses for the mortgage lenders. For the past five years it has been operated by a consortium of creditors whose foolish investments in this fiasco deserved no quarter whatsoever from the nation’s hard-pressed taxpayers.

Indeed, as time passed the creditors consortium had become desperate to find a mullet stupid enough to buy them out at a premium to their written down loan values, but the going was exceedingly tough. After all, the giant complex was still financially radioactive after upwards of $3.5 billion of losses from the 2006 LBO.

Moreover, additional headwinds arose from the fact that Stuy Town is a perennial object of local politicians demagogueing on behalf of “affordable” housing.

Then again that’s why we have oily politicians like Senator Chuck Schumer. As a real estate industry publication described it,

Their proposal was almost the exact opposite of Tishman Speyer's 2006 bid: They would take on little debt and keep the apartments as rentals, eyeing steady returns instead of swift profits. And they deemed it essential to win over the city, tenants and local politicians -- perhaps in part to New York's senior senator, Chuck Schumer.

At a tenant meeting at Stuy Town last week, Schumer said the Tishman Speyer saga had taught him the need for "outside leverage." "And I found a way," he added. "I realized that to get such a huge mortgage, you need the backing of Freddie Mac and Fannie Mae.

So here is what’s going to happen. The busted lenders to the 2006 deal are going to make a killing by getting $5.3 billion for positions which are not remotely worth that.

At the same time, Blackstone will get subsidized financing from Freddie Mac, $225 million worth of benefits from New York City through an additional loan and uncollected taxes and the rights to sell the complex’s 700,000 square feet of air rights, which could be worth hundreds of millions.

Why all this largesse?

At the end of the day it will mean that a mere 500 units out of the 11,000 will be reserved for families making no more than $62,000 per year, and another 4,500 for families making up to $128,000 per year.

That’s right. The taxpayers of America are being dragged into a $5 billion LBO on the very site where an identical one blew up less than seven years ago—–purportedly to help families that are in the top 10% of income earners in the nation.

Needless to say, there is a simple alternative. Abolish Freddie Mac, Fannie Mae and all the rest of the Washington’s crony capitalist machinery and turn housing finance over to the free market where it belongs.

If there are citizens in need who can pass a means test and can’t work owing to age or genuine disability give them cash to fund their own shelter choices. And if they are able bodied and willing to work, top up their wages with earned income tax credits or similar cash transfers.

But let’s stop being stupid. Blackstone is not the United Way.

From Bloomberg

Who do billionaires turn to when they want to buy apartment complexes? The U.S. taxpayer.

Barry Sternlicht's Starwood Capital Group and Stephen Schwarzman's Blackstone Group LP are in talks with Freddie Mac to finance two transactions totaling more than $10 billion, according to people with knowledge of the negotiations. Those discussions come after the government-owned mortgage giant already agreed to back Lone Star Funds' $7.6 billion deal to buy Home Properties Inc. and Brookfield Asset Management Inc.'s $2.5 billion takeover of Associated Estates Realty Corp.

Read the rest at Bloomberg.

-- This feed and its contents are the property of The Huffington Post, and use is subject to our terms. It may be used for personal consumption, but may not be distributed on a website.

In the coming days, the Philippines will be in the global spotlight. It will play host to one of the world's most important gatherings, the APEC Economic Leaders' Meeting -- a prestigious hobnob comparable with the G20 and G7 summits.

Though the world's most powerful man, Vladimir Putin, and Indonesia's charismatic leader, Jokowi, have chosen to skip the event to focus on domestic political challenges, the leaders of the world' three biggest economies (America, China, and Japan), however, are poised to set foot in the Philippines. Dozens of Fortune 500 CEOs are also expected to attend the APEC meetings, raising the stakes for a country that is no longer seen as the 'Sick Man of Asia'.

By spreading the APEC events across the country's major cities and tourism hubs, the government has tried to fully showcase its best potentials to global investors, who have begun to take a closer look at what some (prematurely) view as Asia's "new rising tiger." The midsize Southeast Asian country will also have a crack at chairing discussions among global superpowers, which are expected to hold bilateral talks with Philippine President Benigno Aquino on the sidelines of the APEC summit.

Yet many ordinary Filipinos, and civil society groups and activists, are raising a legitimate question: What is there for us? Why should we spend so much, and indulge in such extravagance, just to host foreign dignitaries and businessmen? Why risk so much inconvenience for the ordinary Filipinos so that global elites can enjoy the best of our (legendary tradition of) hospitality?

These questions and lamentations are based on Filipino pragmatism and also conventional wisdom, which puts premium on tangible benefits and concrete outcomes. Yet, one can't but notice how countries (just as people) around the world are sometimes willing to go the distance to enhance their prestige and self-image. As far as national influence and attractiveness to foreign investors is concerned, image matters. And this is essentially what hosting major events like APEC is primarily about. The Philippines hopes to recast its image before the global community.

But the Aquino administration also hopes to leverage the occasion to expand the Philippines' trade and investment linkages across the Pacific Rim, while rallying international support amidst a festering maritime dispute in portions of the South China Sea, which it aptly calls the "West Philippine Sea". The APEC, however, is bound to be a contentious issue, especially in absence of tangible short-term benefits but very visible inconvenience for millions of people in the country.

The March of Misery

Having visited all major countries in East Asia, including almost all members of the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN), I couldn't but notice how the Philippines' basic infrastructure lags far behind its regional peers and former competitors.

The country's bustling capital, Metro Manila, has the world's worst traffic congestion. Every day, millions of commuters end up wasting many precious hours struggling through an excruciatingly slow traffic, missing the chance to, among other things, spend more time with their loved ones. Arriving at work, most people are already exhausted from the morning traffic as well as that of the previous night. Notwithstanding Filipino's famed patience and kindness, the very fabric of human relations has been gradually undermined by daily traffic ordeal.

Manila's decrepit infrastructure, exacerbated by its badly managed public transportation industry, doesn't only affect overall economic productivity, but, more importantly, chips away at the citizens' quality of life. Meanwhile, high-level officials and businessmen have the luxury to retreat into their SUVs and take immediate respite in conveniently-located (but expensive) homes near their work place. Fixing the traffic crisis, according to one study, might cost $65 billion over the next 15 years.

And yet, the Aquino administration (astonishingly) chose Manila as the host for the APEC Economic Leaders Meeting, exacerbating the traffic mayhem in the capital city, which is responsible for more than a third of the country's total economic output. Aside from earmarking around PHP 10 billion for hosting foreign dignitaries, the government decided to close major thoroughfares in the city, practically asphyxiating an already troubled public transportation system.

Thousands of people had to walk for kilometers under scorching heat as buses and other forms of public transportation retreated in face of a traffic gridlock. Schools have been shut down practically for a week, while major business and establishments are expected to absorb P11 billion in foregone productivity -- potentially translating into a 1 percent reduction in quarterly Gross Domestic Product (GDP) growth, just as the country reels from a major exports earnings plunge to a four-year low.

No wonder then, more and more people have come to see APEC as nothing but as the latest installation of the government and global elites' insensitivity to the plight of ordinary people. As correctly suggested by former President Fidel Ramos, who oversaw the country's successful hosting of the 1996 edition of APEC, the government could have hosted the event in Subic or Clark, major logistics hub that could have accommodated thousands of delegates if proper preparations and investments were made years earlier.

The Hanging Fruits

One thing many ordinary citizens overlook, however, is that hosting APEC is rotationally assigned to each member country. The Philippines didn't bid for hosting the event. There was never an option to skip hosting it, unless the country wants to shut down its doors, exit the APEC, and become another hermit kingdom in East Asia.

What the Philippines could decide on was how and where it would host the APEC's key events. And when it is your turn to host it, you can't but be compared to how other member countries performed during their turn. To put things into perspective, last year China spent around $6 billion to ensure a smooth hosting of the APEC summit. It spent $95 million alone to overhaul the landscaping of the main venue for the APEC summit along Yanqi Lake.

Meanwhile, the Philippines (also a middle-income country like China) is allocating roughly $200 million in preparation for the entire series of APEC meetings, which have been spread across the country. While this still undoubtedly looks unjustifiably ostentatious to millions of desperately poor Filipino families, and a legion of government critics, the Aquino administration hopes to compensate by enhancing the Philippines' global image and recast the country as a new investment hub in Asia.

The APEC region is the backbone of the Philippine economy. As much as 80.7 percent of the Philippines' trade, 80.81 percent of its total tourist arrivals, and about half of its foreign development assistance funds come from the Asia-Pacific region. The APEC's main agenda is expected to focus on the necessity for deeper regional integration and macro-economic coordination against beggar-thy-neighbor policies (i.e., competitive currency devaluation). But much of the action will be on the sidelines.

In economic terms, the Aquino administration hopes that the event will allow the Philippines to expand trade interaction with APEC countries, including a new free trade agreement with Chile; consult with President Obama on joining the American-led Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP) free trade agreement, which has concluded its first phase of negotiations; and finalize a major infrastructure deal with Prime Minister Shinzo Abe of Japan. There could also be discussions with Chinese President Xi Jinping on the Philippines' pending decision to join the Asian Infrastructure Investment Bank (AIIB), which will be a crucial element in redrawing the regional infrastructure landscape.

Geopolitically, the APEC also provides the Philippines to fortify its burgeoning security relations with major allies like the United States and Japan, while Vietnam is poised to sign a new strategic partnership agreement with the Philippines, with greater focus on maritime security cooperation in light of China's assertiveness in the South China Sea.

Aquino and his American counterpart, Barack Obama, are both expected to raise the South China Sea disputes on the sidelines of the APEC summit, placing China under increasing diplomatic pressure. Yet, the summit also provides unique opportunity for China and the Philippines to establish urgently-needed confidence-building measures to avoid accidental clashes and unwanted conflict in the South China Sea.

Many progressive groups are skeptical vis-à-vis the Philippines' further integration into the global markets, especially given the country's miserable record (especially in manufacturing and agriculture) since joining the World Trade Organization. Others have raised concerns on supposed growing American meddling/involvement in the Philippines' disputes with China.

Nevertheless, one can say that the APEC at least provides a distinct chance for the Philippines to stay, albeit momentarily, at the center of high-stakes discussions, which will define the future of the Asia-Pacific order. Sometimes, for leaders in smaller countries in search of their place in the world, this is all that matters.

-- This feed and its contents are the property of The Huffington Post, and use is subject to our terms. It may be used for personal consumption, but may not be distributed on a website.

Over the past several weeks, as Alcoa and Century cut aluminum production nationwide, James Markus, a 23-year-veteran aluminum worker, acutely felt the pain of those laid off.

That’s because just two years ago, in October of 2013, Markus and 750 fellow aluminum workers lost their jobs at Ormet when the Hannibal, Ohio, smelter closed. He struggled for a year to retrain and get new work and witnessed friends and acquaintances foundering. Now he’s confronted with the images of thousands more aluminum workers and their families facing those same hard times.

What makes it all worse is that it’s unnecessary. The shutdowns, production curtailments and layoffs could have been averted. The American aluminum industry needed help, which it didn’t get. The industry is desperate for relief from a flood of illegally subsidized aluminum imports from China. Many American aluminum workers like Markus would still be employed if the United States proactively enforced international trade regulations and if U.S. law permitted trade sanctions before companies and workers suffer terrible losses.

iStock image by alexsl

Markus is bitter that federal officials did not intervene to save Ormet. “Many politicians on the national level in this country have turned a deaf ear and blind eye toward working people,” he said.

Five months after Ormet closed, Alcoa shuttered its Massena East Plant in New York. But hope remained because Alcoa said it planned a $600 million modernization that would restore work there.

Seven months after that, in October of 2014, Sherwin Alumina locked 450 members of the United Steelworkers (USW) union out of its Gregory, Texas, plant. It’s now operating at a severely diminished capacity with no incentive to restore the USW workers and full production while artificially cheap Chinese aluminum overwhelms the U.S. market.

Eight months later, in July of 2015, Century said it would never reopen its Ravenswood plant in West Virginia. That meant none of the 650 workers who lost their jobs when it closed in 2009 could ever return to work there.

The following month, Century reported that it would idle its Hawesville, Ky., aluminum plant, costing 565 workers their family-supporting jobs.

Last month, Century said that by year’s end, it would cut a third of its aluminum production at its Sebree, Ky., plant, throwing 150 workers out of their jobs and that it may close its Mt. Holly, S.C., aluminum smelter, putting 600 workers on the street.

Then, early this month Alcoa announced 1,500 of its workers would lose their paychecks because it was closing or cutting production at three smelters. Two are in Washington state and the third is Massena West in New York.

In addition, Alcoa said it would permanently close the Massena East plant, dashing hopes for modernization and restoration of jobs.

This relentless cutting and closing has devastated thousands of skilled workers and their families. Markus talked about how the shuttering affected workers at his plant: “It was frustrating for many of them because they did not have a skill or trade outside of the work that they did at Ormet. That made it hard for them to find a job in our area where they could maintain the same level of income for their families.”

While these American workers suffer, China subsidizes its aluminum industry to protect its citizens from job loss. International law forbids export of government-subsidized products because their artificially low prices would warp the market in the receiving country and damage industry there. But market analysts and Century officials say that is exactly what China is doing.

Century’s president and chief executive, Michael Bless, said China is flouting international law. Its overproduction, illegal subsidies and dumping of aluminum in the U.S. market caused the collapse of the U.S. industry. Speaking specifically of the Sebree plant, he said its“continued production is now in jeopardy due to unfair Chinese trade behavior.”

The financial securities firm Nomura reported that Chinese aluminum producers benefit from opaque tax credits or cheap loans made by local governments on the condition that the companies sustain production and employment.

The American industry is not the only victim of this practice. Producers in India are complaining about China as well. Abhijit Pati, chief executive officer of Vedanta Group’s aluminum business, told the Wall Street Journal, “Due to a rise in imports from China domestic [Indian] producers are getting choked. There is tremendous subsidization of aluminum production in China.”

In a market where aluminum prices are hovering just above a six-year low, China has raised capacity, production and exports. China increased production 18 percent year-to-date and increased exports by 14.4 percent. This has contributed to the low prices. And the low prices triggered the American shutdowns.

China has seized ever-increasing portions of the global market since the turn of the century, when its production accounted for 11 percent. Now, China produces half of the world’s aluminum, and it’s not stopping. Already this year it added 3 million tons to its annual smelting capacity and may add another million tons before year’s end. While American producers close.

To block China from dumping its illegally subsidized aluminum into the U.S. market, Century and the USW are working together in the China Trade Taskforce. It is asking the Office of the U.S. Trade Representative to investigate reports of misclassified Chinese aluminum exports evading U.S. import duties and illegally subsidized Chinese exports. The group is simply asking the U.S. government to enforce international trade law, which would preserve the American industry and American jobs.

Markus, who was 55 when he lost his job at Ormet, does not understand why trade officials haven’t intervened already. Too many workers, too many families have suffered.

When Monroe County, Ohio, lost Ormet, which had been its largest employer, nothing filled the void. Markus saw region’s economy fade. Small businesses on both sides of the Ohio River near the plant shut down. And, he noted, the people who had owned or worked in those shops lost their jobs too.

This is the legacy of bad trade and badly enforced trade laws.

-- This feed and its contents are the property of The Huffington Post, and use is subject to our terms. It may be used for personal consumption, but may not be distributed on a website.

Instead of asking friends and family for referrals to good attorneys, more and more potential clients are turning to the Internet to look for a lawyer to represent them and help them with their legal needs. So what are some marketing tactics you can use to get them to call you, or take the call to action on your site. Let's go through both the practical nuts-and-bolts ideas and the wider philosophy.

Image Credit: Flickr, Creative Commons: Jes

Offer something free
The best way to increase conversions on any site, especially a law site, is to offer something in return for the conversion. That's why you see so many sites offering a free e-book or report in exchange for an email address. In psychology, there's something called a "yes ladder." If you make someone say yes to something small, they are more likely to say "yes" to something big. Very few people can say "no" to a free offer if it's relevant to them.

Make sure you follow up
The best way to ensure that conversions go up is to make sure that you follow them up. According to Adam Zayed, founding partner of Zayed Law Offices, "This is especially true when it comes to legal services, people are hesitant to pull the trigger. Just because you have them as a reader, or in your sales funnel, doesn't necessarily mean that they will convert." It might mean sending a follow up email, or it might mean picking up the phone, but until you do all you can to convert a prospective client, you are leaving money, and conversion rates, on the table.

Be clear, to the point and honest
Nobody likes to feel tricked in any situation. When you're giving legal advice, you have to be double-sure, because of the complexity of the subject matter, that you put across what you mean to in the way you intend it. Use a test audience if it's necessary. When it comes to increasing conversion rates, you need to be honest. If you, for instance, wanted to increase your twitter following for your company, then having a part of your site that says, "Follow Us On Twitter" is not going to make people think you're illegitimate. However, if you have annoying pop ups that won't let them read until they follow you on twitter, you will lose that reader.

Provide actionable information and a call to action
There is one thing that a lot of webmasters and companies make on the Internet: That's not having a clear call to action. When you are talking to someone, you don't want to sell, sell, sell. You don't want your customer to feel as though they are being pressured into the sale, because in person, you have their attention and they can't escape. On the Internet, it's a little different. On the Internet, there are a million temptations - a million things to draw a person's attention away. You only have a few seconds, statistically, before a person loses interest in your site and clicks to a new page. You need to tell them what to do in those few seconds.

Optimize for conversion
The fifth step is to dedicate a portion of your time each month to going through your website and optimizing it. If things get a little messy, then change that. The process of optimizing is an ongoing one, so do a good job!

-- This feed and its contents are the property of The Huffington Post, and use is subject to our terms. It may be used for personal consumption, but may not be distributed on a website.

Powerful Answers Award Announces 12 Winners Vying for Three $1,000,000 Prizes

Sleeping Your Way to the Top: An Interview With Motokuni Takaoka

Chris Christie Just Taught You a Business Lesson (And It's Not What You Think)

Why You Don't Want to Be a Silicon Valley Unicorn

Fired on Friday the 13th and 3 Ways to Move Forward

Moving From Words to Deeds to End Anonymous Companies

The Ultimate Method to Creating a Powerful Unique Selling Proposition

Weekend Roundup: Victory in Myanmar for Democracy -- On a Leash

How to Pick the Best Credit Card for You: 4 Easy Steps

1. Check your credit

2. Identify which type of credit card you need

If you want to build or rebuild credit: Student or secured credit card

If you want to save on interest: Low-interest, 0% APR or balance transfer card

If you want to earn rewards: Rewards, travel or cash back

3. Narrow your choices by asking the right questions

For student and secured cards:

For low-interest, 0% APR or balance transfer cards:

For rewards, travel or cash-back cards:

4. Apply for the card that offers you the highest overall value

For student and secured cards:

For low-interest, 0% APR or balance transfer cards:

For rewards, travel or cash-back cards:

So you've found the best credit card. What's next?

10 Communication Secrets of Great Leaders

7 Challenges Successful People Overcome

Savings Bonds: How/When to Cash In

Purpose at Work: It Comes from Within

After Paris Attacks, the West Needs to Join with Russia, Iran and Syria to Fight This Evil

After Paris: War Is Not What It Used to Be

If Ever There Was a Case for Genuine Global Action in the Mideast, Destroying ISIS Is It

The Stench of Freddie Mac Is Back -- An $18 Billion Spree Of Crony Capitalist Thievery

Philippines' APEC Fever: Is it Worth it?

The Terrible Legacy of Unenforced Trade Laws

5 Ways to Increase Conversion Rates for Potential Clients Visiting Your Law Site