A Sukkot Lesson on Optimizing Our Environment for Goal-Setting

During the first two days of Sukkot, I had to contend with some lousy weather. It was dreary and raining the entire time. In spite of the weather, I decided to sit in the sukkah for both meals on the first day. It wasn't torrential downpour by the time I got around to eating either meal, but it was bad enough where it put a damper on the holiday spirit. Nevertheless, I did not let the weather get the better of me because I wanted to fulfill the mitzvah of dwelling in the sukkah (לשבת בסוכה). One could also argue that I am a glutton for punishment.

Joking set aside, there is a leniency to be made for when it rains. If it is raining, one is exempt from eating in the sukkah (Mishnah, Sukkah 28b). [One says kiddush and hamotzi before going indoors (Kitzur Shulchan Aruch, 135:3)]. The Shulchan Aruch expands upon the Mishnah and says that if it is too cold or it is too uncomfortable to sit in the sukkah, one is exempt (Orach Chayim 639:2). Even if it stops raining and the sukkah is still wet, one is still exempt from sitting in the sukkah (Shevet Hakehati 1:199).

This leniency caught my eye because me living my Jewish life in the 21st-century Orthodox world, leniencies are hard to come by because it seems to get more stringent with each passing year. The leniency caught my eye for another reason: it is the only mitzvah that you can exempt yourself from if you are uncomfortable while doing it. There are some, such as the Chabad Lubavitch, that stay outside even when it is raining. Even so, it is an exception, not a norm. During the yom tov, I asked myself why the leniency was the law.

I was unable to find a more spiritual answer to the question, so I came up with one of my own. Sukkot is referred to as "the time of our joy," and there are multiple reasons for that title. I certainly think that part of going inside in the event of rain is to maintain the joyous nature of the holiday. However, I think there is something more to it. The sukkah represents the fragile and ephemeral nature of life (Rashbam), and because of that, we are supposed to find joy in uncertainty.

At the same time, the leniency teaches us something about how we interact with our environment. I recently read two relevant self-help books: Willpower Doesn't Work and Better Than Before: What I Learned About Making and Breaking Habits. It got me to think about the role our environment plays, and perhaps that we only have so much willpower to exert before we get exhausted. Both books emphasize the idea of making good habits easier to follow [almost to the point of sheer automation] and removing everything in your environment that conflicts with your decisions or goals.

While both books argue the limits of willpower, it nevertheless requires a different sort of willpower to make this work. After all, automating good habits and making it difficult to partake in bad habits requires a structural change. There needs to be at least some initial willpower or motivation to make the change because otherwise, one ends up wallowing in status quo. Change has to take place. A decision to move past the comfort zone has to be made and something has to be done. Looking at personal change from this lens could help better explain why the first step is so hard to take.

For centuries, the sukkah has embodied what those in the field of positive psychology have recently discovered. On the one hand, we do not have control over such things as the weather. On the other hand, we control how we react to the adverse situation. When a less-than-ideal external force comes in and makes a situation more intolerable, we are meant to respond favorably. That is what the leniency teaches us: if are to experience the maximum amount of joy, we have to first recognize the situation we find ourselves in. Then we have to find a way to make the situation better. We then take the courage to act on it. As American author Neale Donald Walsch once said, "Life begins at the end of your comfort zone." The questions I can leave you pondering is this: how can you internalize this Sukkot lesson?  How can you change your environment to be the best version of you? What are you willing to do step out of your comfort zone and start living your life?

חג סכות שמח!

Going from Yom Kippur to Sukkot: A Transition from Repentance to Joy

The Jewish calendar around this time of year (the Jewish month of Tishrei) is one where a Jew almost feels like a chicken with its head cut off. Within one month, there are four Jewish holidays: Rosh Hashanah, Yom Kippur, Sukkot, and Shemini Artzeret/Simchat Torah. In addition to our normal lives, Jews have spiritual preparation, meal preparation, and sukkah building to contend with. Within the craziness is the time between Yom Kippur and Sukkot. Normally, that is the time to make sure the sukkah is built and that meals are lined up for the first days of Sukkot. Within the commotion, I find something else more spiritual when looking at this craziness within the context of the High Holiday structure.

Elul is our spiritual preparation to get us geared up for the holidays to come. Rosh Hashanah is our time to get that initial spiritual jolt by listening to shofar blasts. Yom Kippur is a spiritual spa day: no food, no drink, no worry about comfort as is represented by not wearing leather shoes. Rosh Hashanah and Yom Kippur have a few common themes. They act as a reminder of our limits and imperfections, as well as our own mortality. The chest-thumping and the guilt trips cannot go on indefinitely. If they did, we would be debilitated. That is why Yom Kippur only lasts one day, and that is why there is a change of tone within the holidays. The switch does not begin at the end of Yom Kippur when we say to ourselves "Thank G-d we can eat again." It happens during the Ne'ilah service towards the end of the Yom Kippur services.

R. Israel Salanter taught that as a minimum, one did teshuvah (repentance) between Rosh Hashanah and Yom Kippur. If you want to take it up a notch, you start during the Jewish month of Elul. However, if you really want to take the concept of teshuvah seriously, you start at Ne'ilah services. Why? Ne'ilah represents the turning point in which we act on all the spiritual work we did between Elul and Ne'ilah in the hopes of a better future.

As my Rabbi, R. Shmuel Herzfeld, discussed this Yom Kippur, our past does not define our future. That is the essential lesson of Yom Kippur. Judaism is not a fatalistic tradition in which we believe that we are condemned by genetics, environment, or G-d Himself. We take those efforts from Elul, Rosh Hashanah, and Yom Kippur, and we transform ourselves into something more.

There are many reasons to be joyful for Sukkot. R. Shlomo Wolbe expresses the view that Yom Kippur and Sukkot are juxtaposed is that we received positive judgement from G-d. Our ability to have another chance to work on ourselves, our goals, our teshuvah, are all reasons to be joyful.

Another reason to be joyful is to be thankful for what we have. The sukkah is a temporary structure that is flimsy relative to an actual house or building. That sukkah is a metaphor for life: ephemeral, fragile, uncertain. One thing we realize is that we become thankful for all that we have in the simplest of settings because life does not come from material fulfillment, but spiritual fulfillment. Additionally, the joy of Sukkot comes from becoming at peace with our environment and who we are (R. Yitzhak Berkowits).

Speaking of being at peace with ourselves, my Maharat, Ruth Friedman, brought up a certain tension that exists during Yom Kippur. On the one hand, we are meant to be our most spiritual selves to the point where we act like angels on Yom Kippur. We wear white, we don't eat or drink, we say "Baruch shem kavod malchuto l'olam va'ed" out loud, and we wear our tallit in the evening. On the other hand, we are meant to bring our most honest selves to Yom Kippur: confess all of our imperfections from the previous year and figure out how we can be better next year.

Going off Maharat Friedman's words and R. Berkowits' interpretation, I think that we are meant to find joy in the paradox of striving for perfection while realizing our human limitations. As Maharat Friedman brought up during Yom Kippur, we need to find a way to accept our non-angelic humanity while still striving for our best. Coming to terms with both our humanity and our expectations not only helps because it helps optimize goal-setting, but it helps bring us closer to G-d since we can feel the joy of Sukkot, as well as life, all the more so.

Teshuvah Is an Ongoing Process, and It Is Not Just for Yom Kippur

'Tis the Jewish season...for repentance, that is. We are currently in between Rosh Hashanah and Yom Kippur, which is known as Yamim Noraim (ימים נוראים). During these ten days, we are meant to reflect on the themes and motifs of the holidays while making amends for wrongs we committed in the past [year] by doing teshuvah (תשובה). Although teshuvah is commonly translated as "repentance," the word is related to the Hebrew verb לשוב, "to return." Teshuvah is more about returning to your good self. The teshuvah process for the High Holy Days reaches its climax during Yom Kippur. With regards to sins that are committed between man and G-d, they are forgiven, as is illustrated by Kol Nidre. As for sins committed between other people, the teshuvah process is meant to have taken place by the time Yom Kippur reaches its end, at which time, forgiveness is hopefully given because the individual who did the wrong has made amends.

This next bit is strictly from my personal observations, but it seems that after Yom Kippur ends, teshuvah is set aside. When I say "set aside," I don't mean that people aren't doing teshuvah during the rest of the year or that it never gets brought up again. After all, asking for teshuvah is in our daily prayers three times a day. On the other hand, it is one of many blessings and prayers recited in daily liturgy, and it can easily get lost among so many other motifs. In practice, there is a de-emphasis during the rest of the year to the point of "thank G-d I don't have to do this again until next Rosh Hashanah." I don't mean to say that we need to emphasize it year-round the way we do during the Yamim Noraim. At the same time, we have to remember that teshuvah is not reserved only for the Yamim Noraim, and I think as such for a few reasons beyond the daily liturgy.

At the Ne'ilah service during Yom Kippur, we are meant to gear up and shift our thoughts and actions towards the teshuvah that we were supposed to work on during Yamim Noraim. R. Israel Salanter even said that those who are really religious are those who start doing teshuvah during Ne'ilah instead of waiting until Yamim Noraim of the following year. This mentality helps us keep teshuvah at the forefront of our thoughts instead of being at the back-burner.

The idea of integrating teshuvah as a constant in our daily life is important. As Hillel said in Pirke Avot (1:13), he who does not increase [his Torah learning] decreases (ודלא מוסיף יסף). Although there are certain constants in life, the truth is that life is also in flux. You learn to adapt to the change or get stuck. You learn to improve or you will regress. There is no staying in one place. To quote Frida Kahlo, "nothing is absolute, everything changes, everything moves, everything revolutionizes, everything comes and goes." That is reality. As we develop our characteristic traits and our Torah learning, we have to keep teshuvah ever so in mind so we can grow. Growth and teshuvah go hand-in-hand. They also help shape our purpose. R. Yonah's commentary on Pirke Avot 1:13 is that one who feels no need to learn more is spiritually dead, and that the gift of life is wasted on that individual. Keeping teshuvah at the forefront is not just good ethical advice: it gives our life the fullest meaning possible.

There is another reason we need to keep teshuvah as part of our personal development, and that is the nature of the yetzer hara (יצר הרע), or the Evil Inclination. In Pirkei Avot 4:1, Ben Zoma says that a strong person is one who subdues his Evil Inclination (הכובש את יצרו). In Midrash Shmuel's commentary on Pirkei Avot 4:1, he reminds us of how the yetzer hara differs from an enemy of a physical war. One is that the yetzer hara can successfully pass itself off as your friend. The second is that physical war is about physical security, whereas the yetzer hara is a fight for your spiritual life. The third aspect, and the one that is most apropos to this conversation, is that in a physical war, once the enemy is vanquished, the enemy won't come back. That is not the case with the yetzer hara. Even if you manage to subdue or mitigate the yetzer hara at a certain time, that does not mean the yetzer hara cannot "come back from the dead." It can always make a reappearance. The idea of such relapse is regrettably all too familiar with those dealing with addiction, and that notion plays out in Jewish thought. Midrash Shmuel's comments imply that we need to be so alert about teshuvah that we need to be mindful of things that we might have thought were already resolved.

The process of teshuvah is not for the fainthearted because it makes us confront our ego and pushes us outside of our comfort zone. Teshuvah goes well beyond feeling bad for past actions or saying "I'm sorry." It is about making some major changes to our character traits, or at the very least, our behavior. As such, it requires constant reflection, introspection, and alterations to maintain a certain level of behavior. I believe that the story of Jonah and Nineveh is not read on Yom Kippur because it shows us an exemplar of teshuvah. Quite the opposite! If anything, the people of Nineveh managed to undo their teshuvah by the end of the Book of Jonah. My take on why the Book of Jonah is read on Yom Kippur is to remind us that even when we do teshuvah initially, we can always drop the ball and relapse later. The Book of Jonah reminds us how fragile our humanity can be, and how we need to be mindful of it for our teshuvah to have permanence. May our teshuvah be sincere and everlasting this Yom Kippur!

Sanders' "Stop BEZOS Act" is Anti-Business Nonsense That Would Harm the Poor

I will say this about Bernie Sanders: what he lacks in knowledge of economics, he sure makes up for in his fodder that provides me with plenty of material to write about and analyze. From Medicare for All and breaking up the big banks to free college for all, Sanders has no shortage in hair-brained ideas. This brings us to last week when Sanders introduced the Stop Bad Employers by Zeroing Out Subsidies Act (Stop BEZOS Act). Based on the fact that the bill is named after Amazon CEO Jeff Bezos, it is becoming clear that Amazon has replaced Wal-Mart as the archetypical "evil corporation" for those on the Left who are anti-business. Sanders introduced this bill because his mindset is that corporations such as Amazon give really low wages. Because of this low-wage work, it creates a larger amount of Americans on government benefits, which puts strain on the welfare system. From Sanders' point of view, large corporations need to pay "their fair share" in order to keep the system going. Ideally, it would incentivize employers to raise employees' wages high enough so they do not need to be on welfare anymore.

What does the Stop BEZOS Act entail that Sanders thinks he could accomplish his goal? Essentially, the Act is a corporate tax equivalent to 100 percent of a qualified employees' government benefits. As an example, if an employee received $15,000 in food stamps and other government benefits, the employer would have to pay the $15,000 to the government for that employee. Any employer with over 500 employees would be financially responsible for its employees' government benefits. While businesses with over 500 employees account for 0.3 percent of all firms, they account for 46.8 percent of private-sector employees as of Q1 2017 (BLS). What we see with these demographics alone is that it is not going to simply affect the Amazons, the Wal-Marts, or the McDonald's. It would have an impact on thousands of employees. Would that impact be net positive or negative?

It should not take too much brainpower to determine whether the net impact would be positive or negative. The Stop BEZOS Act is asking any employer with over 500 employees to pay for its employees' government benefits. Let us take a look at the cost of some of these benefits. The average food stamp subsidy in 2017 was $254 per month (or $3,048 per year). In 2014, the average spend per enrollee on Medicaid was $6,396. Average Medicaid spend was $17,476 for seniors and $19,033 for disabled individuals. According to the Congressional Budget Office (CBO), the average subsidy for those receiving federal housing subsidies was $7,600 in 2015 (p. 11). School lunch subsidies from the USDA average $447 per child per year. The Left-Leaning Center for Budget and Policy Priorities provides further analysis in this vain. If you were an employer that qualified under the Stop BEZOS Act, you could see how the cost of labor would greatly increase very quickly.

What is the effect of a significant increase in the cost of labor? Sanders thinks that employers will increase employees' wages to something "more livable." The problem here is basic mathematics. If a low-wage worker is only producing $9 worth of revenue per hour but are being paid $15 or $20 an hour, it becomes untenable. You might have some employees that attempt that. If we look at the effects of minimum wage laws as a proxy of "what happens when cost of labor significantly increases," I can give you a few more likely responses if the Stop BEZOS Act would be enacted into law. The cost of the good or service being sold increases. Low-wage workers would be fired and/or less low-wage workers would be hired because workers would become more expensive. Employers could invest in technology to automate what low-wage workers currently do. Depending on the industry, an employer could outsource the labor to a poorer country where cost of labor is cheaper. Alternatively, employers could move their headquarters to a state with less generous benefits since benefits vary from state to state. An employer could also keep employment at 499 employees to avoid the Act, which would be similar to what we see in the French labor market. The point is that that there would be a number of ways to avoid the Stop BEZOS Act.

The Act would be discriminatory against families with children, disabled individuals, minorities, and older individuals. How so? Workers who receive government benefits would become thousands of dollars more expensive to employ. It would disproportionately affect families with children because some benefits are only for families with children (e.g., subsidized school lunches, child tax credit). With the case of food stamps, household size helps determine the subsidy size, which means that employees with children are more likely to qualify for food stamps. This would provide employers greater incentive to higher childless households or married couples over parents or single mothers (more on that below). It would also disproportionately affect disabled individuals. Why? Because those who are on Medicaid now become thousands of dollars more expensive to hire. Since older individuals are more likely to be on Medicaid, this could plausibly increase age discrimination in the workplace.

Also, when looking at Census data on poverty and income, which demographics are more likely to have the lowest median income household? Single mothers and African-Americans, just to name two. How could these demographics be harmed? Under Sanders' Act, employers cannot collect information related to government welfare program eligibility. As we have observed in "ban the box" laws, if the employer has less information, they will use other proxies to guess about an individual's background. In this case, the HR department at Amazon or Wal-Mart could use factors such as gender, age, neighborhood, or race to filter out certain individuals from the hiring process because they are attempting to make an educated guess based on the information available.

Finally, let's point out an inconsistency in Sanders' logic. If government benefits such as food stamps truly acted as subsidies to employers hiring tons of low-wage workers, he would have to acknowledge that his ideas of Medicare for All and "free college tuition for all" are also subsidies to Amazon, Wal-Mart, and the like. More to the point, Sanders' logic on the issue is flawed because employers actually raise wages in response to higher welfare benefits. The reason? Low-income employees are competing with government welfare programs for a potential employee's time. As welfare benefits increase, the value of not working increases. In order to draw employees in, the wage needs to be high enough, certainly higher than working part-time or not at all.

This is another example of "good intentions, bad results" that permeates throughout the Far Left's economic thinking. If implemented, the most likely outcome is that the Stop BEZOS Act would harm the individuals that it is trying to help. Not only would there be more job discrimination against these individuals, but it would increase their dependency on the welfare system because the Stop BEZOS Act reduced job opportunities for low-skilled workers. There would be other unintended consequences, including probable corporate lobbying for cutting government benefits and difficulties with administering the Act, or even the fact that it very well might not raise wages that much because benefit eligibility for government programs is done at the household level, not the income level (CBPP).

While I do not have any expectation that the Stop BEZOS Act to be enacted during this congressional session, I do worry that the Democrats are embracing a nonsensical, dangerous form of economics, much like the Republicans did when they embraced Trump and his protectionism that is harming our economy. I call on Americans to denounce such idiocy or find ways to make low-wage workers more productive so they can make higher wages. But given how appealing a "free" handout is, I don't see this sort of foolishness leaving American politics anytime soon.

My Favorite Reasons for Blowing the Shofar on Rosh Hashanah

As the late Aretha Franklin said, "Music does a lot of things for a lot of people. It's transporting, for sure. It can take you right back, years back, to the very moment certain things happened in your life. It's uplifting, it's encouraging, it's strengthening." Believe it or not, this quote is very relatable to Rosh Hashanah, the Jewish New Year. While there are multiple features to Rosh Hashanah, the single most important one is hearing the shofar because it is the only active mitzvah of the 613 mitzvot related to Rosh Hashanah (derived from Leviticus 23:24; Numbers 29). The shofar is an ancient musical horn, typically made from a ram's horn. The shofar has been used in multiple areas of Jewish history besides Rosh Hashanah, including announcing the New Moon (Psalm 81:3), announcing the jubilee year (Leviticus 25:9), for starting war (Joshua 6:4; Judges 3:27, 7:16, 7:20; I Samuel 8:3), the coronation of a king (I Kings 1:34, 39, 41), and was part of the orchestra that King David had when instruments were played during Temple services (Psalm 150:3).

But let's bring it back to Rosh Hashanah. I wanted to know why this mitzvah was so instrumental to the holy day celebrations. I looked through reasons provided by Chabad, Aish HaTorah, the Orthodox Union, a list of R. Sa'adiah Ga'on's ten reasons for the shofar (courtesy of Ohr Somaych), as well as books on my bookshelf, and this culminates the list of my favorites:

1. Spiritual Wake-Up Call to Repentance. The shofar makes a piercing sound that jolts us out of our lethargic state, much like an alarm clock. Rosh Hashanah acts as the beginning of the Days of Awe, the ten-day period between Rosh Hashanah and Yom Kippur during which one gets their affairs from the previous year in order and does teshuvah (repentance). Looking at Nevi'im (the Prophets), the shofar was a reminder of our admonitions and reminded us why we need to clean up our act. Teshuvah  was so important that G-d created it before the Universe (Talmud, Nedarim, 39b). By creating teshuvah, not only has G-d shown us mercy, but G-d has provided us with the opportunity to right our wrongs. 
2. Coronating G-d. Rosh Hashanah is to celebrate the creation of the universe. Since the shofar was used to coronate kings, what a better way to recognize G-d's Kingship and our purpose in the universe? Plus, G-d's Sovereignty is such a major theme is Rosh Hashanah liturgy. 
3. Transported Through Time. Aretha Franklin hit this one on the head. Listening to the shofar transports us to another time, such as when the shofar was blown on Mount Sinai when the Jews received the Torah. It was a simpler time, and that is not the only thing that was simpler.  
4. Simplicity. One thing I noticed about the shofar is the simplicity of the instrument itself. In contrast to the trumpet, trombone, or many other brass instruments, the shofar lacks a pitch-altering device (e.g., valves, telescoping slide mechanism). My theory as to why the instrument is so simple is because we are to return to a simpler essence when it comes to Jewish practice, a topic which I have previously covered. There is a place for understanding nuance because the world is a nuanced place. However, people can get so obsessed with the details that they forget the simple essence that permeates throughout Judaism. There are simple truths that dictate those complexities: G-d is One (Deuteronomy 6:4), love your neighbor like yourself (Leviticus 19:18), walk humbly in His ways (Micha 6:8). Perhaps this is a time to re-examine those simple truths and see how we can implement them in the upcoming year.
5. Awe of G-d. The sound of the shofar can be haunting, potentially so haunting that it inspires the fear of G-d. In the Book of Ecclesiastes (Ch. 3), King Solomon reminds us that there is a time for everything. Rosh Hashanah is a time for the fear of G-d. My understanding of fear of G-d is that we should not be so scared where we are paralyzed, which would make it more akin to awe than fear. Ideally, our relationship with G-d should be one of love, but that is not necessarily doable all the time. When love is not possible, we should still be awe-struck by G-d's power and capacity for many things, which is what the shofar reminds us.
6. Celebration. Rosh Hashanah celebrates another year, another period of time in which we can fulfill our potential. The shofar is meant to be blown when the Messiah arrives (Isaiah 27:13). Until the Messiah arrives, we can still recognize the salvation that G-d brings in our daily lives.

Aretha Franklin was spot-on by saying that music is a transformative experience. The shofar blown on Rosh Hashanah takes on that transformative experience, whether it is awe of G-d, a call to repent, to remind us of our true values, or a call to celebration. I hope that your experience with the shofar is one that transforms you.

שנה טובה ומתוקה!

Parsha Nitzavim: G-d Is Not a Fan of Self-Delusion or Hypocrisy

"Above all else, do not lie to yourself. The man who lies to himself and listens to his own lie comes to a point where he cannot distinguish the truth within him or around him, and so loses all respect for himself and others. And having no respect, he ceases to love." Fyodor Dostoyevsky uttered these wise words in the Brothers Karamazov. Not only that, they are directly related to this week's Torah portion. What we see in this week's Torah portion is a renewal of the covenant between G-d and the people Israel (Deuteronomy 29). The passage shows that those who commit idolatry while taking this covenant are punished (Deuteronomy 29:15-18). However, when looking at the passage, we see a specific type of idolatry come to surface:

והיה בשמעו את דברי האלה הזאת, והתברך בלבבו לאמר שלום יהיה לי כי בשררות לבי, אלך: למען ספות הרוה, את הצמאה

"And it comes to pass, when you hear the words of this curse, that he blesses himself in his heart, saying "I shall have peace, though I walk in the stubbornness of my heart--that the watered be swept away with the dry." -Deuteronomy 29:18

At first glance, this verse is enigmatic. Some context helps. This passage refers to those who lived in particularly idolatrous lands (e.g., Egypt, Canaan) and are still tempted to commit idolatry, even after seeing G-d's wonders. In the verse beforehand (29:17), this particular individual is described with the metaphor of a poisonous root (ראש) or wormwood (לענה). Looking at other biblical passages, this metaphor refers to an individual who does one thing and says another.

With this bitterness and confusion [from these plants], the next verse (29:18) has the blessing in which the individual blesses themselves. The Chofetz Chaim was one to say that this type of idolator was particularly problematic because the rules don't apply to him, and because he made a whole set of rules that directly oppose what the Torah has to say. Since it has become a way of life, this unadulterated selfishness will not be acted upon merely one time. Ramban elucidates by saying that each time this individual sins, he feels the need to up the ante in order to chase a greater thrill. The passage of "the watered be swept away with the dry" could also mean that either the individual will be swept away entirely, or that his actions will be so all-encompassing that they will wipe out the Jewish people (JPS).

As R. Neil Loevinger points out, these interpretations have a commonality: the one committing the sin is oblivious the consequences of their actions. The fact that the dissident/idolater here is blessing themselves (והתברך), i.e., in the reflexive, captures the mindset. R. Aryeh Kaplan goes as far as interpreting the word והתברך as "rationalizing." Not only will no harm come to them, but duplicitously and insincerely taking on the Covenant will actually benefit them since they can hide behind the veil of self-righteousness. How often do you come across someone who thinks they can get away with something because they won't get caught? Whether it is the deceit, disregard for societal norms, mistaken ideas, naïveté, and self-delusion that the rules do not apply because "I am special" that makes this individual dangerous. The good news here is that such behavior is not an inevitability. 

Reading this passage before Rosh Hashanah helps us put perspective on our own behavior. "Did we do all we could?" "Are my goals and priorities properly aligned?" "Did I convince myself was something was right, even though deep down I knew that it was wrong?" "Did we commit improper acts while finding all sorts of rationalization for our behavior?" This is some of the questions we can ask ourselves in preparation for the High Holy Days. Fortunately, we can recognize our mistakes, make our apologies, correct what we can, and lead a more G-dly life. As this week's Torah portion ends, we can choose life over death, and the ability to make that choice is well within our grasp (Deuteronomy 30:11). 

Ten-Year Anniversary of the Federal Takeover of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac

This week marks a significant anniversary in the American mortgage industry. On September 6, 2008,  the Federal Housing Finance Agency (FHFA) placed two government-sponsored enterprises (GSE), the Federal National Mortgage Associate (Fannie Mae) and the Federal Home Loan Mortgage Corporation (Freddie Mac), under conservatorship. Prior to conservatorship, Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac were quasi-governmental, but privately-held firms. Since 2008, they became under the direct management of the federal government since the two GSEs already lost $14.4 billion and could have potentially exacerbated the housing crisis that the United States ended up enduring. Aside from distorting the housing market, one of the major concerns about this conservatorship is that the FHFA has taken on so many loans and bit off more than they could chew.

Since I am running into a time constraint getting ready for the Jewish High Holidays, I am not able to perform a full-scale analysis like I normally would. However, I do want to provide some expert opinions and reports so you can make the call as to how Fannie and Freddie have performed over the past ten years.

• American Enterprise Institute (AEI): May 2018 op-ed piece from AEI housing expert Tobias Peter makes the case for eliminating Fannie and Freddie, as well as a June 2018 AEI op-ed piece on the FHFA needs to "curb its insatiable appetite."
• Center for American Progress: December 2017 policy on how the FHFA should approach successful housing finance reform. 
• Competitive Enterprise Institute: November 2017 policy brief on how Fannie and Freddie pose a threat to taxpayers, and why scaling Fannie and Freddie back is the best policy remedy. 
• Congressional Budget Office (CBO): December 2017 report on expanding the program to transfer credit risk.
• Fannie and Freddie: The most recent annual reports from Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac outlining their financial health.
• Federal Reserve: Fed Governor Jerome Powell gave a speech in July 2017 at AEI outlining the importance of housing finance reform.
• Heritage Foundation: October 2017 report explaining how Fannie and Freddie have created moral hazard, and how the housing market should have a system with private-sector competition. Heritage research fellow Norbert Michel also released a May 2018 op-ed outlining the dangers of government-sponsored mortgage market and how the FHFA is setting us up for another mortgage bailout.
• Urban Institute: April 2018 article explaining Fannie and Freddie's move to increase the debt-to-income ratio to improve mortgage availability (see initial July 2017 report).