Livinglies’s Weblog

Entries tagged as fraud

Foreclosure Defense and Mortgage Meltdown: SCAMS !!!

May 16, 2008 · No Comments

BEWARE OF SCAMS

 

As though it isn’t bad enough, we are receiving increasing numbers of reports of scams, mistakes and just plain stupidity on the part of lenders, investors who own mortgage-backed securities etc.

Like the woman who just told she is in foreclosure by Wells Fargo on a house she never closed title on. Or the “mortgage workout” specialists who specialize in taking your money and running. Like the lawyers who tell clients they know all about the Truth in Lending Act, RESPA, RICO etc., and in fact either know nothing, or worse, know just enough to really screw the client from whom they squeezed a retainer out of.

And then you have stories like this in the Cincinnati area:

Home sale probed for fraud

Warren County and state officials want to know how a Deerfield Township man sold a multimillion-dollar Homearama house he apparently never owned.

“It is being investigated by my office and the (Ohio Attorney General) for possible fraud,” Warren County Prosecutor Rachel Hutzel said Thursday.

Francisca Webster, a Westwood resident who makes $49,000 annually, said she was tricked by a friend, Eric Duke, into putting three Warren County homes - worth millions - in her name so he could later resell them at a profit. He promised her $70,000.

• See details of the deal in the settlement statement
• See the home’s listing in Warren County property records
• See previous story: “Homeowner in over her head”

She has sued him in Hamilton County.

Now, documents reveal Duke “sold” one of those houses - 8662 Hampton Bay Place - to Patricia Stevenson for $2.5 million in a March 15 transaction.

The sale was done even though Duke doesn’t own that property. It remains in Webster’s name.

“People just don’t get how devious and conniving he is,” Webster said. “I’m really stunned.”

Duke’s attorney, Steve Wenke, refused Thursday to make his client available for questions and refused to pass messages to him. “I don’t want him to talk to anybody,” he said. Duke’s phone number isn’t published.

In a March 15 transaction, Stevenson paid Rivendale Property Management Group $271,500 in cash to buy the house for $2.5 million. Rivendale is Duke’s company and lists its address at the Hampton Bay Place house where Duke lives, which is down the street from the house sold to Stevenson.

Webster wants to know how Duke can sell a house she legally owns - but never wanted and desperately wants out of her name.

“I don’t know where we go from here,” an exasperated Webster said Thursday.

ReMax Realtor Simon Moksin said he saw nothing crooked about the deal.

“We got an attorney who represented the title company,” said Moksin, who pocketed a $60,000 commission on the deal.

Not so, said John Brandt, owner of River Valley Title Agency.

Brandt was paid $150 to sign some of the financial documents involved in the deal and act as a signatory witness, not as a representative of his title insurance company. The deal was consummated in Brandt’s Sharonville office.

Even though the documents list Patricia Stevenson as the buyer, Brandt said her husband, Mitch Stevenson, was doing the transacting.

“(Stevenson) never requested a title examination. Duke told him I did (a title search). I did not,” Brandt said Thursday.

Brandt said Mitch Stevenson called him this week to complain Duke cheated him in the deal.

“Apparently, (Mitch Stevenson) took Mr. Duke at his word,” Brandt said. “I really feel sorry for Mr. Stevenson.”

The sale involved a land contract. That is a sale where the buyer pays a monthly mortgage directly to the seller but the seller keeps the deed until all of the payments are made. If they aren’t made, the seller keeps the property and the money already paid.

That’s why there was no loan involved in the deal as is usual in home sales and that’s why there was no change in ownership in county auditor records.

“It was what we commonly call in the industry a cash closing,” Brandt said.

The Stevensons shouldn’t have to travel far to complain to Duke - he lives a house or two away.

Both of the houses were featured in Homearama, the new construction showcase, in 2005.

Efforts to reach the Stevensons were unsuccessful Thursday.

Moksin, the Realtor, would only say that Mitch Stevenson was “a businessman” when asked about his occupation.

• More Mason news. Join the discussion.

Categories: CDO · Eviction · GTC | Honor · Investor · Mortgage · bubble · foreclosure
Tagged: , , , , , , ,

Foreclosures Go Hyper, Up 65%

May 14, 2008 · No Comments

Anyone reading this site will not find it surprising that the number of foreclosures is rising by unprecedented numbers at unprecedented rates. At the same time, the FBI is getting involved claiming mortgage fraud is on the rise at well.

Let’s tell it like it is: Until this scam was perpetrated by Wall Street on the American Public, the cases where people overstated their income or the value fo the house was manipulated were rarely far out of range of reality. It is only now that the major fraud of inflating stated fair market value by 40% or more that the FBI and lenders are looking for ways they can deflect attention to the cases where the borrowers actual numbers don’t match up to the original loan documentation.

Lenders should be careful what they wish for however. And the FBI is only doing a small part of its job, if it does not investigate the “fraud” of both lender and borrower. In most cases, the fraud case against the lender is more complex but far more egregious than anything the borrower did, all of which was well known to the lender,the mortgage broker and everyone else at the closing who didn’t care about anything except getting the borrower’s signature on those papers. 

Nobody cared and the borrower was clueless as to what was really happening. The lender was “underwriting” the loan knowing they had no risk. The mortgage broker knew he had steered the borrower into the loan that would give him the greatest commission and fees — the yield spread premium payments jumped geometrically during this period. The real estate brokers wanted the closing over because the higher the price, the greater their commission, and they wanted “closure” before the inevitable happened — a correction to real fair market values. The appraiser knew that he had to come in a little higher than the contract amount or he wouldn’t be hired again. And so on.

Foreclosure filings continued to climb in April
Actions rise 65 percent over the same month the year before
The Associated Press
updated 4:43 a.m. MT, Wed., May. 14, 2008

LOS ANGELES - More U.S. homeowners fell behind on mortgage payments last month, driving the number of homes facing foreclosure up 65 percent versus the same month last year and contributing to a deepening slide in home values, a research company said Tuesday.

Nationwide, 243,353 homes received at least one foreclosure-related filing in April, up 65 percent from 147,708 in the same month last year and up 4 percent since March, RealtyTrac Inc. said.

Nevada, Arizona, California and Florida were among the hardest hit states, with metropolitan areas in California and Florida accounting for nine of the top 10 areas with the highest rate of foreclosure, the company said.

Irvine, Calif.-based RealtyTrac monitors default notices, auction sale notices and bank repossessions.

One in every 519 U.S. households received a foreclosure filing in April. Foreclosure filings increased from a year earlier in all but eight states.

The combination of weak housing sales, falling home values, tighter mortgage lending criteria and a slowing U.S. economy has left financially strapped homeowners with fewer options to avoid foreclosure. Many can’t find buyers or owe more than their home is worth and can’t get refinanced into an affordable loan.

Efforts by government and the mortgage industry to stem the tide of foreclosures aren’t keeping up with the rising number of troubled homeowners.

The April data show nearly half of the properties received an initial notice of default, suggesting many homes were new entrants to the foreclosure process.

“We’re still sitting at roughly the same percentage of loans handled in any way successfully as we were a year ago, and the volume (of foreclosure filings) still keeps going up,” said Rick Sharga, RealtyTrac’s vice president of marketing. “It’s apparent that what they’ve tried so far isn’t working.”

The U.S. House passed a bill last week that would offer government insurance on $300 billion in new mortgages to refinance loans for an estimated half-million borrowers facing foreclosure, particularly those who now owe more than their houses are worth because of declining values.

House lawmakers also passed a bill that would send $15 billion to states to buy and fix foreclosed homes.

Still, should the homeowner aid package clear the Senate, it faces a potential hurdle in the White House, which has threatened to veto the plan, arguing it’s too risky and amounts to a lender bailout.

Even if a legislative compromise is reached, it could come too late for homeowners with adjustable-rate mortgages scheduled to reset to higher rates this month and the next.

More than 1 million home foreclosures are forecast for 2008.

“It doesn’t look like the volume is going to slow down any time soon,” Sharga said.

More than 54,500 properties were repossessed by lenders nationwide in April. In all, about 2 percent of U.S. households were in some stage of foreclosure during the month, RealtyTrac said.

Still, as foreclosed properties pile up, they add to the inventory of homes on the market and can drag down home prices. The impact is felt mostly in regions where foreclosures are concentrated, such as Southern California, the Las Vegas area, South Florida and parts of Arizona.

Nevada posted the worst foreclosure rate in the nation, with one in every 146 households receiving a foreclosure-related notice last month, nearly four times the national rate.

The number of properties with a filing jumped 95 percent versus April last year but declined 5 percent from March.

California had the most properties facing foreclosure at 64,683, an increase of 112 percent from April 2007. The number of properties declined less than 1 percent from March.

The state posted the second-highest foreclosure rate in the country, with one in every 204 households receiving a foreclosure-related notice.

California metro areas accounted for six of the 10 U.S. metropolitan areas with the highest foreclosure rates, led by Merced, with one in every 66 households receiving a foreclosure notice.

Arizona had the third-highest foreclosure rate, with one in every 224 households reporting a foreclosure filing in April. A total of 11,620 homes reported at least one filing, up nearly 181 percent from a year earlier and up 26 percent from the previous month.

 

Like Las Vegas and inland regions in California, areas of Arizona saw a sharp run-up in speculator-driven home prices and new home construction during the housing boom.

Florida had 35,264 homes reporting at least one foreclosure filing last month, a 146 percent jump from a year earlier and a 17 percent hike from March. That translates into a foreclosure rate of one in every 242 households, the fourth-highest in the nation.

The other states among the 10 with the highest foreclosure rates in April were Colorado, Maryland, Georgia, Ohio, Michigan and Massachusetts.

Categories: CDO · CORRUPTION · Eviction · GTC | Honor · Investor · Mortgage · bubble · currency · education · foreclosure · interest rates
Tagged: , , , , ,

Foreclosure Defense: Non-Judicial Sale States

April 24, 2008 · 4 Comments

Most of my experience is in judicial sale states where the foreclosure is a lawsuit started by the lender. In those cases, when you challenge the Lender or mortgage service provider on its authroity to bring the action and counterclaim on violations of Truth in Lending, fraud etc, you are the counterclaimant.

In states where they use “Trustee” deeds, (a practice which I think waives due process rights that are not waivable) the lender merely gives some kind of notice to the Trustee and the Trustee posts the notice of sale. ANY CHALLENGE YOU WISH TO REGISTER REQUIRES YOU TO START THE JUDICIAL PROCESS AND SO YOU ARE CALLED THE CLAIMANT OR PETITIONER OR PLAINTIFF.

Your best first challenge is to demand copies of documents through a request to produce or whatever it is called in your local jurisdiction. The clerk of the court will assist you my giving you the form or a copy of some request to produce recently filed. 

  • You want to demand a copy of that notice because you want to know who sent it, what they said, and whether the information came from yet another third party, which it probably did. 
  • So then you want a copy of the documents showing that whoever gave notice to the alleged lender (who is probably not the lender anymore because of some sale or assignment that did not identify your mortgage and note).
  • You also want copies of whatever documents they are relying upon, along with copies of any documents showing transfer of the mortgage and note, or assignment of the mortgage servicing rights. In many cases these documents do not exist. In that case, you win they lose and there is no foreclosure. 
  • The burden is on THEM to show they own the mortgage and note and how they came to be the owner.
  • In states that follow the non-judicial sale practice, as soon as the notice of sale is posted the burden shifts to you the borrower to file something to stop the foreclosure. 
  • Remember, if you are asked, that violations of Truth in Lending are NOT waivable. They can’t tell you it is too late to file the claim. 
  • If asked what you are trying to accomplish it is this: 
  1. vacate the foreclosure sale notice as invalid 
  2. challenge authority of Trustee to commence foreclosure sale 
  3. challenge authority of whoever reported to Trustee that payments had not been made 
  4. assert violations of TILA, RESPA, RICO and trade regulations
  5. challenge validity of sale/transfer of mortgage rights to investors 
  6. counterclaim or claim against the Trustee, lender and whoever the real party in interest is — the one who actually asserts ownership of the mortgage and note 
  7. stop the foreclosure 
  8. stop the sale 
  9. get copies of the documents given to the Trustee who then started the non-judicial foreclosure sale 
  10. get refunds, damages and fees
PERSISTENT AND DETERMINATION PAYS OFF. YOU CAN WIN THIS!!!!

Categories: CDO · Eviction · GTC | Honor · Investor · Mortgage · bubble · currency · foreclosure · inflation · politics
Tagged: , , , , , , ,

Foreclosure Defense Strategies: Sale Pending

April 22, 2008 · 7 Comments

 

Here is a strategy for one person in California whose lenders are GMAC and Countrywide. He is about one week away from sale of his property. Feel free to use what suits you.

  • Keep in mind that the hyper-inflated values used by the appraiser, lender, underwriter, and mortgage broker constitute a violation, in my opinion, of the very abuse that TILA (Truth in Lending Act) was intended to stop: hiding the true cost of your loan. 
  • If your house is priced at $500,000 and you agree to pay 5% interest, you are agreeing to pay $25,000 in interest. 
  • But if the real fair market value was only $350,000 then the $25,000 you are paying in interest is actually 7.14% and that was NOT disclosed in TILA statement and neither was the possibility that the appraisal could be wrong.
  • This means that the interest, points, costs and fees were all misrepresented and you are entitled to a full refund, which in the case below could amount to over $100,000 from the lender.

 

OK, first the disclaimer, since I am a licensed attorney in Florida and the United States Courts and the U.S. Bankruptcy Court. I have not conducted an interview with you, offered you legal advice, nor suggested that you rely upon my advice or use my advice or any facts I share with you without consulting competent counsel in any state or Federal Court or in connection with any communication with your GMAC lender or Countrywide second mortgage. NEEDLESS TO SAY, WITH A SALE DATE LOOMING IN THE NEXT WEEK OR SO, YOU NEED TO MOVE VERY QUICKLY.

 

The following is an outline of information which you should read, re-read and study from livinglies.wordpress.com. 

 

Feel free to lift from this email or the blogsite any verbiage that is helpful to you in the pleadings you file in State and Federal Court (Bankruptcy Court). 

 

As I understand it, your intention is to first file a motion which I assume will look something like the following, and that you will be hand delivering the original to the Clerk of the Court, a copy to the Judge assigned to the case along with a request for an emergency hearing, and a copy to the attorney on the opposing side — and I assume that your local rules require your signature(s) on your Emergency Motion to be Notarized:

VERIFIED EMERGENCY MOTION TO SET SET ASIDE JUDGMENT, CANCEL SALE AND DISMISS ACTION FOR FAILURE OF JURISDICTION AND LACK OF STANDING

Comes now the defendants, xxxxxxxxxx and ___ xxxxxxx his wife, Defendants in the above-styled action and move this Court to vacate and set aside the Judgement entered on the __- day of ___, 2007/8, vacate and set aside the order dated __ day of ___, 2008 setting the sale date, and canceling the sale of the subject property and as grounds therefor says that the Plaintiff committed a fraud upon the Court in that the Plaintiff does not now and did not, at the time of the foreclosure, own the mortgage, the mortgage note, any security agreements, nor have the requisite power to represent the real party in interest, nor did the Plaintiff allege facts in support thereof. This Emergency motion is not filed for the purposes of delay. The true facts (and consequent fraud perpetrated upon this Court by Plaintiff) regarding the prior sale of the risk, servicing and ownership of the mortgage and note regarding the subject real property and alleged liability did not come to the attention of the undersigned defendants until the last 24 hours.

I HEREBY CERTIFY that a true and correct copy was sent by FAX to opposing counsel at the following number _____________________ and by U.S. Mail at the following address _________________________.

SIGNATURE

NOTARY

 

I further understand that you intend to file a Chapter 13 bankruptcy, await the motion for relief from stay for the foreclosure to proceed and that you intend to contest the motion for relief from stay by alleging the same thing as I have outlined in the State Court action and that in addition you will go to the Bankruptcy clerk’s office to file an adversary proceeding.

 

I assume you will put the “liability” in your bankruptcy proceeding as a contingent liability since it was procured by fraud along with a statement that the Creditor is not a creditor but claims to be one, and that the mortgage encumbrance is not a valid lien.

 

1. You have a house that was initially purchased in the year 2000 for $315,000.

2. You have done some refinancing during which your house was “appraised” at $750,000 around 3 1/2 years ago, which is about the middle of the period wherein a scheme had been hatched: money was made free by selling unratable securities to banks, governmental agencies, pensions, mutual funds and individual investors offering (a) a higher rate of return than they could otherwise get and (b) a higher rate of return than the underlying “investment” (mortgage) was paying. These were called collateralized debt obligations (CDOs) or collateralized mortgage obligations (CMOs) or other forms of “derivative securities, including but not limited to mortgage swap and other “hedge products, all of which were outside the regulatory scheme contemplated by the United States Federal Reserve and the various agencies controlling issuance and disclosure and sale or trading of such securities.

3. The seller’s of these securities obtained AAA ratings from Moody’s and S&P who were competing for market share of the ratings business and ended up literally going fishing with the people who were representatives of the securities that were being rated. Analysis was replaced by negotiation and thus AAA rated securities were sold when in fact they should have ben unrated.

4. The securities were sold to investors (including governments around the world, who now must write-off a portion of their “cash on hand” and cut back social services) with “disclosures” that the proceeds of sale would be used to pay the interest and repay the obligation, thus giving rise to an obvious Ponzi scheme, which was a violation of laws and rules under the Federal Securities and Exchange act of 1933, and the Securities and Exchange rules, and applicable and similar State laws and rules

5. The investment bankers and other intermediaries who were selling the securities were making a bundle of money through commissions, fees, and mark-ups from their own portfolio which they bought from mortgage aggregators.

6. The demand for these high rated “cash equivalent” securities sky-rocketed, causing the investment bankers and retail brokerages to step up pressure on mortgage aggregators to come up with more “product” to sell. This aggregation process is either done within the investment banking firm or by a third party who also gets a “mark-up”, rebate or kickback.

7. The aggregators went to mortgage brokers and lending institutions (financial and non-financial) offering financial incentives to the mortgage banks, non-financial lenders, and mortgage brokers to (a) steer customers (borrowers) into mortgage terms that were contrary to the interests of the borrower (b) contained terms that conformed to the needs of the investment bankers that were selling the bogus non-ratable securities and (c) adopting practices and tacit understandings to pressure or trick the borrower to sign the papers that would ultimately be aggregated into pools of the aforesaid bogus securities.

8. The “underwriting” lenders allowed practices of creating fictitious borrower income and assets, fictitious appraised values all driven up by the influx of “free money,” in which all parties to the transaction, except the borrower understood that there was no risk underwritten by the “lender” who was passing along the risk to the aggregator and eventually to the investor in the CDO or CMO.

9. Appraisers understood that they would never be hired again if they did not confirm the value of the property at a high enough level to close the financing deal and the sale of the home and were thus given improper financial incentives and coerced into providing fraudulent assessment of the value of surrounding property and the subject property itself.

10. Borrowers were thus lulled, pressured or tricked into believing that the fair market value was as stated in their closing documents, and that the lender, the underwriter and the insurers of title and property were all relying upon those representations concerning fair market value.

11. In fact, the reverse was true, all participants except the borrower understood full well that the fair market value was over-stated, that the risks were actually being undertaken by the borrower and the investor in the bogus securities and that all the parties in between were profiting from this Ponzi scheme.

12. As a result the borrowers were all overcharged for points, costs, fees, interest, in transactions that they never would have signed had full disclosure been made.

13. Under the above facts, the parties involved in the transaction, except the borrower, were engaged in a comprehensive nationwide scheme violating the provisions of the Truth in Lending Act, Securities Laws, RESPA and RICO and the comparable laws and rules of the applicable state agencies.

14. Multiple investigations of these actions are taking place under actions started by attorney generals of the United States and various state governments and at least one U.S.L Trustee in the Bankruptcy Court of Judge Raymond B Ray in the Southern District of Florida wherein the the trustee has been instructed to investigate the civil and criminal responsibilities of Countrywide Mortgage, the results of which will apply equally to thousands of other parties involved in this scheme which resulted in undermining the economy, money supply and wealth of the United States of America, other countries, and virtually all American citizens.

Categories: CDO · Eviction · GTC | Honor · Investor · Mortgage · bubble · currency · foreclosure · inflation · politics
Tagged: , , , , ,

Mortgage Meltdown: Sue the Lender’s Auditor

March 26, 2008 · 2 Comments

The New York Times just published an article today summarizing a detailed 580 page report showing that KPMG, the auditor for Century Financial (now defunct) expressly approved a change in accounting method that allowed the company to show a profit when under normal accounting rules the company would have shown a loss. Implicitly this shows the ever-widening complicity of third parties to loan transaction forsaking legal, professional and moral responsibility to get paid an extra fee for looking the other way. Anyone who took a loan based upon the reputation or professionalism of the lender was taken in by a ruse when they looked at the financial statements of the lender.

  • Senator Obama is correct when he states that the politics of division has caused us to look suspiciously at each other when we should be looking at predatory corporations stealing our wealth while government either looks the other way or lends a helping hand.  
  • Here is the article: 
  • Report Takes Aim at Mortgage Lender’s Auditor

By VIKAS BAJAJ

Published: March 26, 2008

In a sweeping indictment of one of the nation’s largest accounting firms, an investigator released a report on Wednesday that said “improper and imprudent practices” by a once high-flying mortgage company were condoned and enabled by its auditors.

Related

Text of the Report (pdf)

KPMG, one of the Big Four accounting firms, endorsed a move by New Century Financial, a failed mortgage company, to change its accounting practices in a way that allowed the company to report profits, rather than losses, at the height of the housing boom, an independent report commissioned by a division of the Justice Department concluded.

The report is the most comprehensive and damning document that has been released about the failings of a mortgage business. Some of its accusations echo charges that surfaced during the collapse of Enron, the energy giant, which collapsed in accounting fraud more than six years ago.

The scathing 580-page report documents how New Century lowered its reserves for loans that investors were forcing it to buy back even as such repurchases were surging. Had it not changed its accounting, the company would have reported a loss rather a profit in the second half of 2006.

The profit was important because it allowed executives at the company to earn bonuses and allay concerns that the company was healthy when in fact its business was coming apart, the report contends.

The report is the result of a five-month investigation by Michael J. Missal, a lawyer and former official at the Securities and Exchange Commission hired by the United States Trustee overseeing the New Century bankruptcy. It may allow New Century, which is in bankrutpcy, to sue KPMG.

Categories: Bush · CDO · CORRUPTION · Clinton · Eviction · GTC | Honor · Obama · bubble · community banks · credit unions · currency · foreclosure · inflation · interest rates · politics
Tagged: , , , , , ,

VISA IPO FRAUD

March 24, 2008 · 1 Comment

VISA Fraud Costing New Stockholders and Consumers Billions of Dollars

The media and lazy stock analysts have failed to read what was right in front of them. Visa faces some challenging times and in-fighting between the stockholders, the junior financial institutions members and stockholders on the one hand, and the handful of controlling mega-banks on the other hand. The prospects of government anti-trust units and private actions against VISA and other networks has never been higher. It’s not the first time and it won’t the the last.

ATM Fraud and Anti-Competitive Practices

When will the media and analysts report that Visa et al are foregoing $180 million per year in profit for the sole purpose of keeping a death grip on potential competition from small financial institutions, exposing the gaping hole in the “service” offering of a few large financial institutions that control Visa policies? 

This is costing Visa shareholders at least a couple of billion dollars, and restricting the prospects of the company in the global economy. 

It is also costing the American consumers who use ATMs a whopping $5 billion per year in EXCESS fees. And it is costing the American Economy something on the order of $75 billion in revenues to small business owners, in addition to the billions in profits that small financial institutions should be making, and the resulting impact of restricting the ability of small institutions to invest money locally (for lack of deposits they could otherwise attract).

Visa and MasterCard, and NYCE, and STAR and Pulse, are all networks that are essentially controlled directly or indirectly by just a few large financial institutions for the benefit of themselves and contrary to the interests of their junior member financial institutions, the customers of smaller financial institutions, small merchants, artificially inflating costs to the operators of the terminals, the customers/cardholders that use the terminals and depressing their own revenues at the expense of what are now public shareholders.

These institutions have been using the networks to force small financial institutions to use their services (community banks and credit unions), while using their “rule-making authority” (largely regarded as quasi governmental, even though it isn’t), to make sure the smaller banks and credit unions can’t compete on a level playing field in providing ATM convenience. 

The ATM “Scrip” terminal, which performs all ATM functions and allows the merchant to fund the withdrawal from his cash drawer, is a very inexpensive, simple and small-footprint way of extending the reach of small banks and credit unions into stores and other locations that are more convenient to customers, at lower cost to the bank and the customer, and which would enhance sales at smaller merchants. 

It’s use at about 25,000 “off the radar” locations in the United States and hundreds of thousands of locations around the world also increases the volume of transactions, revenues and profit at the network level, so why wouldn’t the networks promote it? Instead they changed their policy in 1997 and have ever since been aggressively publishing bulletins containing “rules” prohibiting ATM Scrip Terminals and threatening banks with $10,000 fines per day. 

The networks enforce this policy through intimidation, and have aggressively adopted policies inhibiting fair competition between their controlling large financial institution, on the one hand —  and all the rest of the depository institutions in the country who would compete with them for deposits and loans customers if they could offer convenient low-cost or no-cost ATM access. 

This puts VISA and other network squarely in the cross hairs of DOJ and private actions for anti-competitive practices (hardly the first time they were accused of that).  

By adopting policies that are plainly contrary to its own business model in order to benefit a few large institutions VISA has decreased its revenues and profits and now threatens to decrease its prospect for maintaining or expanding market share, because the rest of the world is going toward ATM Scrip Terminals. 

Beginning in April 1997, these policies were adopted, after previously allowing, even welcoming the ATM Scrip terminal into the world of ATM convenience. The networks began systematically putting hundreds of companies and processors out of business who allow the scrip terminal to operate. 

By the way, CU24, a credit union network, NYCE and other networks expressly permit “scrip” terminals but do not promote them.  Others don’t exclude it but actively make it difficult for anyone to operate ATM Scrip terminals. The average U.S. surcharge for ATM Scrip is now under $1.00. The average ATM surcharge for the big machines is around $3.00 now. Hence the larger financial institutions, whose death grip on the system prevents smaller institutions from competing with them, are picking up $3 per transactions for those few customers of community banks and credit unions while offering free ATM service to their own customers. The small banks and credit unions can do the same thing but are prevented from doing so by the “rules” of the networks. 

These networks, including Visa with all of its other potholes, have passed rules against it. It is simply a contrived barrier to entry into the ATM convenience model, and all the resulting benefits of getting new customers, depositors and loans prospects.  

It is a barrier to small banks and credit unions who could put out 20  ATM Scrip terminals at a total cost of $20,000 into 20 locations closer to the work and homes of its customers. The networks, particularly VISA, require the small financial institution to invest their $20,000 into One machine which of course presents no competition at all to BOA, Chase etc. 

20 machines strategically placed by each small financial institution would present an intolerable competitive problem for the large banks, so they have squelched it. The cost of that policy now extends, as a result of the VISA IPO, from the financial services marketplace, to investors in Visa equities, who will be deprived of seeing their company’s revenues and profits artificially restricted by a policy that has nothing to do with the business of their company and everything to do with the business of third parties whose interests are antithetical to the interests of Visa’s business model.

Instead of carrying and operating costs of perhaps $200 per year for 20 ATM scrip terminals, small financial institutions face the daunting prospect of paying around $12,000 per month! This is a figure that would all but obliterate those smaller institutions that are profitable and would create solvency problems in credit unions.  

Thus they are required to restrict their ATM presence to one or two terminals when they could be placing dozens if not hundreds out in the competitive geographic area, producing millions of transactions, and substantial revenues to Visa et al. 

How many transactions? The answer is that back in 1997, there were nearly 13 million ATM Scrip transactions per month in the U.S. alone. Now the figure is under 1 million, and that is “sub rosa”. Allowing for the continuation of what had been meteoric growth of the ATM Scrip business, the number of transactions could today could easily exceed 200 million per month. Allowing 8 cents as the revenue of the network for each of these transactions means that Visa et al are foregoing total revenues of at least $16 million per month, most of which is profit. 

Thus somewhere around $180 million in net profit before taxes is being diverted from the networks (mostly VISA) to the benefit of third parties whose business directly benefits from these policies.

Requiring the use of big bulky, machines with vaults, cash dispensers, and other bells and whistles increases the operating cost, cash management, and insurance costs to hundreds of dollars per month, from what would be about $10 per year for the smaller “scrip” terminal. 

How will these networks explain to their member banks and now their shareholders why they are restricting electronic access to depository accounts (which is, after all, their business) and thus eliminating large revenue opportunities and profit on the bottom line? 

And if they do not change their “rules,” then the prospect of other networks or direct agreements between processor, banks and merchants becomes more likely, particularly in view of the fact that the “scrip” terminal is the dominant player in all emerging markets around the world. 

Will stockholders be pleased to learn that Visa profits and market share are shrinking because of the interests of a few large customers in the U.S. domestic banking business?

Categories: ATM · CORRUPTION · Investor · Obama · community banks · credit unions · currency · inflation · interest rates · politics · securities fraud
Tagged: , , , , , ,

Mortgage Meltdown: Foreclosure Offense and Defense: Plan of Engagement

March 21, 2008 · 4 Comments


I am researching the possibility that there might be a securities violation that could inure to YOUR benefit (not just the buyers of CDOs). You see there are several breaches that occurred here all stemming from the fact that the market was artificially inflated. The scheme most closely resembles a Ponzi scheme and so it smacks of breach of fiduciary duty, lack of TILA disclosures, AND the sale of a security (which means failure to provide a prospectus, right of rescission, and other elements of registering or offering securities for sale of a security). remember that rescission rights, no matter what you may hear to the contrary, could extend to many years. Most people don’t know that. 

And in securities litigation, failure to provide a prospectus disclosing everything including your rescission rights, risk factors and how the deal is actually working, including use of proceeds, rights can extend far into the future with the statute of limitations running not from the date of the transaction, which sometimes happens, but more often from the date you discovered that you defrauded and how you were defrauded. 

The security in this case was the note and mortgage. You were encouraged by all the predatory participants to believe that the house was worth a certain amount of money (i.e., that fair market value was as stated), that you could sit back and watch it go up further without any action on your part, and without any knowledge on your part that the scheme would only work for YOU if they could continue to artificially inflate the apparent fair market values in the housing market. That way, you were told, you could either refinance and get money out of the deal or sell and get money out of the deal, all without any risk at all, or so it seemed. This then is a passive investment promising a return based upon the offering and the “work” of the offeror. 

All of these legal theories overlap, along with fraud in the inducement, fraud in the execution, failure to disclose under SEC rules, and violations of the various banking regulations which require a lender to do due diligence. In this case the lender did no due diligence (hence the proliferation of “no doc Loans) because they knew in advance that they were not assuming the risk of loss in the event of default. 

If you have a mind to do so I would encourage you to read the 10k and other filings of Countrywide Financial Corporation and you will see that they were selling the CDOs with a return of 8%, which of course is higher than any mortgage rate they were getting. The proceeds from the sale of the securities were allowed to be used for operational expenses INCLUDING service of the debt. Right there in black and white and signed by the executive of the company itself in full disclosure to avoid jail, is an admission of a Ponzi scheme —- which by definition is a scheme in which a greater fool down the line puts in money which is then used to profit the Ponzi operator and to pay prior “investors” until the money runs out.

So I would start with someone that can audit your closing documents from a TILA (Truth in Lending Act). Second I would look up some securities lawyers that really know their stuff, and who might be willing to take this on a contingency. And I would look up the class action lawyers in your neighborhood and have a talk with them. I am certain they will be very interested. Also go see and pester your local City Attorney and County Attorney and State Attorney would be very interested in this because they are ALL (1) under pressure to get relief for the government agency or unit and (2) understaffed and not very knowledgeable about the terms of relief that are available. They need help and you through your connection with me and others, can provide it. You can give them our blogsite so they can be brought up to speed. I can serve as adviser, expert or whatever. 

Here are some of the possible objectives that could be set without regard to any evaluation of the likelihood of success in your situation or any other:

1. Rescission and damages: tricky to get both, but the theory would be that you were deprived of the money you spent, you were deprived of the benefit of the bargain, and you lost money just by moving in and reasonably relying on what appeared to be the due diligence of the lender, appraiser, underwriter, etc., none of whom was doing the normal due diligence because there was no actual risk to them — including the fact that they they all could express plausible deniability. What they didn’t figure on, because they were too short-sighted, was the sudden implosion. So the plausible deniability defense is gone, a casualty of sheer volume. No lender, appraiser, or underwriter can expect to pass the giggle test when they go out and value a house at $250,000 one week and then $275,000 the following week, and then $335,000 the next month without wondering whether these prices are a real. 

2. Reduction of mortgage balance to reflect inflated values. So if your mortgage is $225,000 and the house is now showing a fair market value of $185,000, you should get a $40,000 reduction in the principal due on your mortgage.

3. Reduction in the interest rate, and getting fixed rate.

4. Reduction of payments without negative amortization.

5. Refund of loan origination costs or reduction of mortgage further for those amounts.

6. Refund the down payment you made or reduction of the balance further for that amount.

7. Payment of compensatory damages

8. Payment of Attorney Fees

9. Payment of treble damages under applicable RICO and similar acts.

10. Payment of punitive damages for bad behavior.

11. Payment of exemplary damages to serve as an example to others who might engage in the same wrongful behavior.

12. Settlement (where both parties release each other from claims made in litigation) MIGHT include a provision for reduction of your mortgage balance and reduction of your payments; this could be tied to an agreement wherein over the years if you are able to refinance or sell the house for more than the amount of the reduced mortgage, the lender can participate as an equity partner in the house. If worded properly, this would enable the lender, the investment banking operations and the owners of CDOs to restore the value (all or some) to their balance sheets, thus getting them out of trouble with regulatory authorities in terms of the viability as a continuing business. If such settlements occur on a widespread basis, the housing market will stabilize more quickly and after it stabilizes, the prospects for an earlier recovery are correspondingly enhanced. If real estate values recover, then tax revenues to government will stabilize proportionately and also recover. If people are kept in their homes, the prospect of ghost villages virtually vanishes.

13. With the causes of action for SEC violations, fraud and breach of fiduciary duties involved, there is nothing to stop people who have already been evicted from their homes from bringing these suits and settling with the added factor of taking that vacant house, putting them back in it, with a little money in their pocket so they can right themselves and go on with their lives. 

We are not being so presumptuous to say that we have the key to put ALL the toothpaste back in the tube. However, this approach takes into account the needs of the economy as a whole as well as individual victims and the perpetrators whose downfall might simply hurt more people.

I know this is a nasty business. But it is business. Don’t get mad, get even. And don’t get even, get ahead. When you discuss this with others leave out the the moralizing, and present the “conspiracy” in a calm, deliberate and organized way. Remember that lawyers are busy and some are lazy. You need to get to the meat of the situation quickly to interest them and what you want is someone to take this on a contingency. 

Categories: ATM · Bush · CDO · CORRUPTION · Clinton · GTC | Honor · Investor · Mortgage · Obama · bubble · community banks · credit unions · currency · foreclosure · foreign relations · inflation · interest rates · politics · securities fraud
Tagged: , , , , , , , , ,

Mortgage Meltdown: Consensus versus Intervention

March 16, 2008 · 1 Comment

  • I’ve been working on this problem for over a year. 
  • No act of prescience or brilliance was required to know that if you pour water from a pitcher, eventually it will be empty even if you splash some more in from time to time. There isn’t enough money in the world to save us from a crash. 
  • The ONLY thing that save our economy and the many other economies of the world that are tied to our fortunes is by consensus: 
  • Stop the foreclosures and evictions, 
  • redo the mortgages with incentives for people to stay in their houses, 
  • create a payment pattern that is possible even if it is not ideologically congruent with your philosophy, 
  • restore CDO values as close as possible to par, 
  • enlist the culprits who created this mess because they are the ones with the open channels to get this done, 
  • add to the recent moves to accept CDOs at or near par for valuation purposes (thus increasing capital reserves and allowing the release of billions in loans that are waiting to be made), 
  • change the rules of civil procedures in each of the states on foreclosure to stop or slow them down, 
  • change the rules of civil procedure on pleading to force the foreclosing party to state its case more clearly — especially as to ownership of the loan, 
  • change the rules of civil procedure to stop or slow evictions, and 
  • change the rules of civil procedure to require mediation after the issues are joined, thus providing some breathing room for this all to get worked out. 
  • Legislation can’t do it, executive leadership won’t do it. That leaves the rest of us and hopefully the judiciary, without sacrificing due process and protection of property rights. 
  • It can ONLY happen with consensus. Without agreement, this will crash, inflation will destroy what is left of the middle class and a good part of the upper class and drive the U.S. into third world status before you can say “$30 per gallon.”

Categories: CDO · Eviction · GTC | Honor · Mortgage · Obama · bubble · community banks · credit unions · currency · education · foreclosure · foreign relations · inflation · interest rates · securities fraud
Tagged: , , , , , ,

Mortgage/Credit Bust: Vapor without Value

January 29, 2008 · No Comments

The American Economy: Vapor without Value

My effort here has been to point out that we are creating a fraudulent environment, much like an embezzler, that requires more fraud and more lies each time to cover up the last fraud and the prior lies. Our economy is now one which runs on boom and bust and cannot run any other way unless fundamental changes are made in the paradigm of American politics, econometrics and economics.

This morning, Paul Farrel wrote an article that is precisely on point, in explaining the bust we had in the 1990’s, explaining the bust we are having now, and explaining the next bust which is already in the making. 

The only thing I would add is that I think the policy makers are going to try the same thing again right now to “bail out” the current economic collapse.

If you want to protect your wealth, your retirement, your nest egg your rainy day fund, read this carefully and start thinking about it. 

The American economy is now a house of cards trading in vapor that is “rated” with value. There isn’t enough  real “money” in existence that will bail us out of the funny “money” that has been created. A major shift in our perspective must occur, and it starts with telling the truth. Here, reprinted from this morning, is the best summary of the unvarnished truth that I have found. 

PAUL B. FARRELL

A mind-blowing machine

In America, land of the bubbles, the next pop will be the biggest

By Paul B. Farrell, MarketWatch

Last update: 7:32 p.m. EST Jan. 28, 2008

ARROYO GRANDE, Calif. (MarketWatch) — Three cheers! Wall Street’s got a new rally song: “I’m dreaming dreams, I’m scheming schemes, I’m building castles high.”

Actually it’s the 1919 tune that launched the roaring run-up to the ‘29 crash and the Great Depression. Remember the lyrics: “I’m forever blowing bubbles. Pretty bubbles in the air. They fly so high, nearly reach the sky. Then like my dreams they fade and die.”

  

And it still fits today! Listen to venture capitalist Eric Janszen’s scary new paradigm in “The Next Bubble,” a Harper’s Magazine report: “That the Internet and the housing hyperinflations transpired within a period of 10 years, each creating trillions of fake wealth, is, I believe, only the beginning.”

 

Translation: The next bubble is already expanding. Now listen very closely as Janszen makes the single most dangerous prediction of 2008: “There will and must be many more such booms, for without them the United States can no longer function. The bubble cycle has replaced the business cycle.”

 

After the collapse of the 1990s dot-com bubble we laughed at all the hype they had spewed: “This time it’s different.” “New paradigm.” “New economy that only went up.”

 

Well, stop laughing: The new, new came true, says Janszen. Seriously, the economy and the stock market can no longer function without an ever increasing series of bubbles, one after another, rapidly expanding then bursting, with all the manic trading, risk, uncertainty, hypervolatility and distortions that come with it.

Janszen traces bubbles through history: From the 1720’s South Sea Bubble to the housing-subprime bubble. Bubbles are accelerating, becoming more frequent, a frenzy feeding on itself: “Nowadays we barely pause between such bouts of insanity. The dot-com crash of the early 2000s should have been followed by decades of soul-searching; instead, even before the old bubble fully deflated, a new mania began to take place.”

 

What’s so scary is not that the subprime bubble was happening so fast on the heels of the dot-com bubble, not that the pundits, the public and the policy makers all appeared to be ignoring it. What’s really scary is that our best and brightest leaders in Washington, Wall Street and Corporate America wanted to create a bubble! They even threw jet fuel on this raging fire with cheap money, favorable taxes and minimal oversight.

 

Of course the Treasury and the Fed will never admit it, but they saw the housing bubble as a healthy economic necessity in their warped ideology! In their myopic minds, the housing bubble was the messiah “saving” America from a big, bad bear/recession.

 

Publicly they denied the bubble’s toxicity, dismissing it as “regional froth.” Privately, they conspired to create a massive new bubble driving America deep into debt.

 

‘New economy’ morphs into out-of-control robot

 

This new ideology is extremely dangerous: It assumes the American economy can no longer be managed by politicians or Wall Street quants. The “new economy” has a life of its own, a “Terminator” from a dark future, an “I, Robot” from Asimov’s sci-fi world.

 

Yes, our economy has become a self-sustaining “bubble-blowing machine” inventing new bubbles at warp-speed even before the last is buried, in endless reincarnations of Schumpeter’s “creative destruction” cycles.

 

What’s next? More asset-backed bubbles. The dot-com ’90s created $7 trillion in market value. The housing boom created $12 trillion in “fake wealth.” Janszen predicts the next great bubble will be a $20 trillion “alternative energy” bubble. In fact, Wall Street’s already hustling biofuels, solar, wind, nuclear, geothermal and hydroelectric as the new alternative energies destined to replace oil, gas and coal in this next new economy.

 

Timing? The new “alternative energies” bubble will last about 8 years, from a 2005 launch till a peak around 2013, when it will “creatively destruct,” when all possible “fake wealth” is squeezed out, when investors wise up to the scam, when that new bubble pops.

 

In his finale, Janszen admits that when the “alternative energy” bubble finally self-destructs around 2013, “we will be left to mop up after yet another devastated industry,” while Wall Street “will already be engineering its next opportunity.”

 

But be warned: Even before we near the end of the “alternative energy” bubble, the law of unintended consequences could trigger a meltdown, not of the bubble but of the “bubble-making machine” itself! The machine will implode, taking down Wall Street, Washington, Corporate America … and with it, the “new economy,” the “new paradigm” and the “bubble-making machine!” (e.s.)

 

‘Black Swan’ self-destructs ’shadow banking’ derivatives

 

The trigger? A “black swan” off the radar and invisible to the quants managing the world’s derivatives.

 

The brilliant supertrader and risk manager Nassim Nicholas Taleb says a “black swan” is an extremely rare, improbable event (like 9/11) that cannot be predicted, yet has catastrophic impact. Black swans are events outside the vision, experience and technology of the world’s derivative traders’ geniuses.

What will the black swan destroy? How about the derivatives market that spreads so far beyond subprime loan obligations.

 

Pimco’s Bill Gross warns that $500 trillion of derivatives are hiding in a “shadow banking system” that “craftily dodges the reserve requirements of traditional institutions and promotes a chain letter, pyramid scheme of leverage … with no requirements to hold reserves against a significant ‘black swan’ run that might break them.”

 

Derivatives have become a renegade army of “I, Robots.” “According to the Bank for International Settlements … total derivatives amount to over $500 trillion, many of them finding their way onto the balance sheets of SIVs, CDOs and other conduits of their ilk comprising the Frankensteinian levered body of shadow banks.”

 

Shadowy? Pyramid schemes? Frankenstein? Terminator? Black swan: Gross paints a much darker future than Janszen: “The last two decades alone have witnessed pyramid schemes involving savings and loans/junk bonds, the small investor/dot-coms, and now global bonds/subprimes … in each and every case the originator of a surefire ‘can’t miss’ concept collected huge premiums from a willing investment public, only to see the pyramid collapse either of its own merits or from the lack of additional gullible investors. There will be more to come, much like a regular university that welcomes a never-ending stream of new ’students’ who pay annual ‘tuition’ to be ‘educated.’”

 

Higher truth

 

Never-ending: Gross and Janszen agree on that. But they’re both wrong. The biggest low in Janszen’s argument: “Given the current state of our economy, the only thing worse than a new bubble is its absence.”

 

Wrong, wrong, wrong! Remember, this new paradigm assumes that the only way the American economy can exist in the future is if Wall Street’s greedy “bubble-blowing machine” keeps feeding on itself, creating an endless, accelerating succession of ever-bigger bubbles.

 

Folks, that’s one of the dumbest economic theories ever, silly “new age” magical-thinking touted as a scientific basis for the new self-indulgent ideology of Wall Street, Washington and Corporate America.

 

There’s a higher truth: The best (not worst) strategy would be to let the “bubble-blowing machine” implode, live with the absence of a new bubble for a while, then quietly step back and reassess our unsustainable “growth-at-all-costs” economic policies that are secretly designed to benefit the self-interests of Wall Street’s insiders who profit by endlessly blowing bubble after bubble … after bubble … after ...(e.s.)

Brave words from someone who isn’t afraid to challenge the conventional wisdom folks. Listen closely to what he says.

Categories: ATM · Bush · CDO · CORRUPTION · Clinton · Edwards · Eviction · GTC | Honor · bubble · community banks · credit unions · currency · education · foreclosure · foreign relations · inflation · interest rates
Tagged: , , , , , , ,

Mortgage Meltdown: Elephant in the Living Room

January 24, 2008 · 1 Comment


David Leonhardt: Congratulations on your article today in the NY Times. You addressed the elephant in the living room. For about 100 years, the United States has been acting like an embezzling bookkeeper. First “borrow” a little. Then borrow more because of “necessity”, now you are in debt you cannot pay and living better than you ought to, buying things you don’t need. Now you have better standing in the economic community and you can get credit (you have more because you are spending more, even if it is not money you earned and not value you contributed) whereas before you would have been laughed at. Each dollar you get into your hands becomes a down payment on something bigger and better that you can’t afford. 

People you buy from want you to buy more because they are making more money on more sales. Your employer is getting bookkeeping figures from you that show nice profits so he is spending and investing his “money” wisely or unwise; (money that isn’t there because you took it). Your vendors come up with ways to give you more credit, and the banks discover there is money to be made lending you money. Your balance sheet looks better and better as millions more like you are stealing from themselves (their home equity) or stealing from others to make the down payment on purchasing assets that they don’t need and in many cases don’t want shortly after they buy them. Balance sheets are getting better and better. “Income” is rising. All the economic indicators show that the U.S. is a magical powerhouse that for some reason could not be reproduced in other countries far more established than ours.

Eventually the big LIE gets bigger. Even the people who know or suspect, disregard their own judgment because things are going so well. Like Detroit automakers ignoring the threat from foreign car manufacturers and losing jobs, real income, and real wealth in the process. Assets rise higher and higher in price, more “equity” is created. The fact that the price rise is pulled only partly by demand is not analyzed or reported. Prices are going up because money is being created, printed and conceptualized by merchants, financial institutions and non-financial institutions who have figured out ways to get more money into the hands of the American consumer. Prices are going up because money’s value is going down. Eventually the embezzler starts to rationalize that with all his/her assets he could pay it back if called upon to do so, disregarding the fact that the value is dependent upon the greater fool theory — that someone will always come along and pay more for what you have. All the embezzlers hope for a miracle.

Longevity further “legitamizes” the illegal activity, the theft from your employer, the trick played on your creditors, and the willingness of the creditors to create, promote and allow the fraud and theft to continue. The day of reckoning we always know, comes to the embezzler. In individual cases it hurts only a few dozen people. But when 300 million people do it, it affects billions of people. While waiting for the end and denying it will ever happen, the embezzler become enslaved to their jobs and their standard of lving. They can’t go on vacation because a substitute acountant would discover that the figures have been manipulated — like the basket measured by various price indexes is revamped by a government measuring inflation. The government has an incentive to lie about inflation because if they didn’t, all the pensions and social security and other payments would have to be increased by more each year. That would leave less money for war and social programs. But the the loss of value of the dollar is catching up to us in what is developing as massive hyperinflation — due this year.

First the inflation caused by the greater fool theory. Second the fact that the tide is out on the massive shock caused by the mortgage meltdown —- embezzlement gone wild. The LIE gets bigger and bigger as the government and industry try to cover it up. But other countries with other central banks and other financial institutions and other investors have finally gotten the idea that the U.S. dollar’s “hegemony” as you call it is based upon vapor. We can’t predict what specific actions governments, financial institutions and commercial enterprises will take to protect themselves from the suspicous dollar, but we can predict with certainty, they will protect themselves before they protect us. The consequences of these actions, individually and collectively could be extremely serious to our government, states’ rights (witness greenhouse standards imposed by states where the Federal government failed to step up), regional alliances (witness alliances of attorney generals on tobacco suits and suits against lenders and investment bankers for the mortgage meltdown), where money is stored, and how commercial transactions are conducted. It will probably have a decisive effect on de facto national borders (sorry Dobbs — you are right, but the game is probably over).

The fact is that our economy, more than any other by a wide margin is primarily based upon consumer spending. There is nothing wrong with consumer spending and there is nothing wrong with profit or capitalism. The bitter pill that is coming, whether we like it or not, is that the money is running out. Increasing liquidity is a euphemism for printing money. But the Fed has little effect on the larger set of transactions that create money supply that the Fed cannot control — like the sale of CDO’s with triple AAA ratings, insured by respected bond insurers in order to get money into the hands of unsophisticated, uneducated (thanks to ignoring the educational needs of our young) and clueless people who trust that a system as large as our whole monetary system could not be manipulated, that the appraisal of the value of their house, the mortgage they were steered into by a mortgage broker, and the approval by the lender lends credibility to the transaction (just like on the other end the investor relied on on AAA ratings insured).

By moving the risk from the lender the only motivation was to lend more and devise increasingly sophisticated techniques to get people to sign up for houses on monthly payments they could afford, only to discover that they were guaranteed to lose the house later. By offering the investor a “safe” investment, and developing incentives along the way to sell, package and offer higher rates of return, they guaranteed an unlimited supply of money which would (like in the eyes of every Ponzi) last forever, because the values would continue to increase by 50% per year or more thus enabling refinancing, more fees and more interest as borrowers get deeper and deeper into a debt they will never be able to cover like our embezzler who took just a “little” as a “loan” at the start. 

Presidential candidates and candidates for other offices are skirting the issue because they don’t have the time to study it and therefore don’t understand it. Obama gets close by intuition, Clinton knows only the old school of economics and the econometrics that were manipulated to produce policy. Edwards, undertands the effect but the cause. McCain, Huckabee, Romney and the rest are in the same camp as Hillary. They just don’t understand the implications of selling our tolls roads, ports, military technology etc. to potentially enemy combatants.

Here is the truth: An economy based upon getting funny money into the hands of consumers who are too unsophisticated (because of lack of education) to know what to do with it, and under so much pressure to spend it, and under the spell of making every dollar count as a down payment on more debt, is a house of cards. The dollar is plummeting not because we have a temporary economic problem. It is plummeting because the core assumptions of our economic systems are based upon false figures, and mythology. An economy that is based upon consumers going into debt rather than savings is doomed just as the embezzler is doomed. A 60 inch TV screen that is purchased on debt that the borrower can never repay is not a real sale, not a real loan, and produces no real revenue or profits.

Added to that, like the embezzler, we are now viewed as the the nice guy next store that nobody knew was a criminal. The far reaching effects of the current socio-economic prospects both domestically and abroad are only beginning to surface. How well or badly the domestic and international populations take the reduction of essential social services like housing, food, fire, police and healthcare, nobody knows. History doesn’t give much reason for hope. We are probably in for a transition that will be historic in all perspectives.

Categories: ATM · Bush · CDO · Clinton · Edwards · Eviction · GTC | Honor · Investor · Iowa · community banks · credit unions · currency · foreclosure · foreign relations · inflation · politics · securities fraud
Tagged: , , , , ,