Faces Of Foreclosure

October 31, 2009: 18.8 Million Vacant Homes in Last Quarter.

We need to dig to get the full story, but there are early indications that some lenders are “donating” money to communities where houses sit after foreclosure so that a new wave of low-income families can purchase them. Many of these homes are the very same houses they threw into foreclosure rather than help the existing homeowners in the first place.

Do you feel crazy yet? No. Well keep reading . . .

Abandoned and vacant foreclosed homes are piling up around the country . . . Repairing the damage from foreclosures is a difficult challenge, because cities, states, community development groups, and even willing banks and servicers have no experience working together on the complicated process of disposing of or reclaiming unwanted properties, said Joseph Schilling, a Virginia Tech urban affairs professor and co-founder of the National Vacant Properties Campaign . . . “We do a pretty good job in this country of recycling cans and plastic bottles,” Schilling said. “But we do an awful job of recycling and reusing vacant properties.”

In some states, even the banks are walking away from homes they threw into foreclosure.

A particular lender — one with a dreadful track record insofar as loan modifications are concerned — is reportedly putting $1 million into Marin County California to help people buy homes, some of which will be the very homes they seized through foreclosure in the past year or two. This is the very same lender that 20-25% of us working with Marin Family Action’s Home Save group have been asking for modifications.

Banks will end up making less from the new loan at the current property value than they would if they modified with the original owners. But they have insurance, don’t they . . . and taxpayers dollars.

What is the guarantee that the new homeowner will be able to keep their jobs and afford the payments down the road? None. Nada.

The San Francisco Chronicle reported on a “shadow inventory” of foreclosed houses—possibly 600,000 nationwide—that have not been placed on the market: “Lenders nationwide are sitting on hundreds of thousands of foreclosed homes that they have not resold or listed for sale, according to numerous data sources. And foreclosures, which banks unload at fire-sale prices, are a major factor driving home values down.”

Does this strike anyone else as insane? Or quite brutal?

This kind of “business” is what has made me feel quite stupid through the years; I keep thinking I’m missing something. There’s something I don’t understand. Obviously. Someone has a few screws lose and I no longer think it is me.

Just read a comment on a blog from Tina, who wrote “Loan modification for them is a game . . . They not going to help anyone . . . ”

Tina hit the nail on the head. Playing with money on the levels of Goldman Sachs, Wells Fargo, Chase, etc. IS a game . . . a game of money with high stakes.

A Vanity Fair article on Goldman Sachs notes that these gentlemen look with scorn on anyone with a tan, as though they are slackers, and pride themselves on “how hard they work.” Jerks. No working mothers have tans . . . they don’t have time. No one in high-tech has a tan. The only people with tans are lifeguards and low-paid farm workers ’cause they actually have to be in the sun. (Oh, and one of the senior executives of Wells Fargo, but that’s cause he lives in California and HAS to have a tan . . . his tan, of course, is fake ’cause he doesn’t actually take time to be in the sun — he could, if he played tennis or golfed with banker buddies. Oh, and his fake tan is a dreadful orange color, but at least it takes attention away from his gel-styled, probably dyed hair.)

Goldman Sachs’ measurements for hard work are just plain old boys’ school silly. They ARE just playing. The average middle-income family works as hard as any of them, yet these non-tan (or the aforementioned fake tan)bankers assume they are impressing someone with these stupid games. They think they deserve bonuses for their tanless incompetency.

I’ve spent more than a year seeking modification. I have a 3-month forbearance with no agreement beyond that to do anything. They eMailed me that they do NOT know who holds the note . . .

What DO these bankers do with their $500,000+ salaries? Drink a lot to forget how much they screw people all day long? I SO would love to talk with their wives to see what life is like in that crooked lane? What do they tell themselves about their husbands cheap views of everyone else on this planet.

I said it before and I’ll say it again, dealing with cancer treatments in 2008 was easier than dealing with Wells Fargo in 2009. I knew what to expect with cancer. The doctors were quite clear. Wells on the other hand . . . Well who knows!

Treasury Department announces permanent mod plan
November 30, 2009

The Treasury Department and Department of Housing and Urban Development has announced a plan to help borrowers convert to permanent loan modifications. As expected, the announcement emphasized the importance of ushering borrowers currently in trial modifications into permanent modifications.

Phyllis Caldwell, chief of the Treasury Department’s Homeownership Preservation Office, said in a press release that with the success of the trial modification program, agency officials will aim to augment the permanent modification plans. “We now must refocus our efforts on the conversion phase to ensure that borrowers and servicers know what their responsibilities are in converting trial modifications to permanent ones,” Caldwell said.

The plan would involve applying more pressure on banks to convert trial modifications into permanent ones. It’s a task that has proved tricky — while over 650,000 borrowers have qualified for trial modifications under the Treasury’s program Making Home Affordable only 375,000 of those are expected to transition to permanent modifications by the end of 2009.

The Treasury plans to disclose how many permanent modifications each bank implements, according to Michael Barr, assistant secretary for financial institutions, a move intended to call out those banks that aren’t performing adequately. “We’re going to be quite focused and direct on particular institutions that are not doing a good job,” Barr said. “Some firms ought to be embarrassed, and they will be.”

A comment from one of the readers of this article:

It is my hope that Ms. Caldwell takes her role seriously, takes no prisoners with regard to enforcement of mortgage servicer slackers, and facilitates IMMEDIATE REMEDIES and SOLUTIONS for homeowners. This problem is an embarrassment to our country! It doesn’t make sense how banks/mortgage servicers are dragging their feet when slated to receive “incentives of several thousand dollars for each mortgage they agree to modify with lower payments. Those payments aren’t made until the modification is permanent.” In fact, it seems more evident that banks/mortgage servicers are benefitting from foreclosures . . . from what? Insurance and government backing for losses?

In a recent meeting with a local real estate agent, she named Chase as the worst bank in all of the mess, followed closely by Wells Fargo. And I just found this re Chase . . . this is shocking. Can’t charters be pulled from banks? Why are they unregulated and out of control?

I’ve been in an on-going nightmare with Chase since mid-2003, involving them forcing me into bankruptcy then to save my home, and the last year and a half of misfeasance, malfeasance, simple incompetence and outright greed. My “three-month modification trial period” has now stretched to eight months, with no end in sight, and no guarantee of anything resembling an equitable mortgage from this. At one point, Chase attempted to have us falsify our incomes to get a better deal. And reporting this occurance, which is a felony, to several federal agencies got us nowhere. Nothing has been done, and it looks like my only remedy is going to be to sue Chase in federal court to see if I can get a mortgage out of them for something less than the 11 3/4% I’m paying now.

A favorite:

The banks are not honoring the agreement they made with the government. They should be fined $1 millions a day until they start modifying loans. Banks want the program to fail. Our government needs to step it up and make the banks accountable.

And then there is Wells Fargo . . .This from Alex Strobel on December 14, 2009:

Wells Fargo has been participating in the Making Home Affordable Program since April 13, 2009 by providing homeowners with home loan mortgage modifications. The numbers:

Wells Fargo has potentially 334,949 homeowners who qualify for a home loan mortgage modification through the Making Home Affordable Program. There are currently 96,137 homeowners in a home loan modification trail period and Wells Fargo has made 3,537 home loan mortgage modifications permanent.

Responses to this included:

We met all the requirements and applied for the HAMP program with Wells Fargo and were told that our “investor” is not participating in the HAMP program only to find out that Wells Fargo is actually our investor. They approved us for their “in-house” modification program, and put us on a 3 month forbearance. We made our final payment on Dec. 1st. We then received a notice saying we need to come up with $14,000 by January 5, 2010 or risk foreclosure proceedings. I have called and emailed Wells Fargo and am waiting for a call back. They are they are putting homeowners through a vicious obstacle course, many won’t find their way, and their lives will be horribly effected in the process. (Coming from a homeowner that had 800+ credit score, now low 600’s, and still no relief from Wells Fargo, just more panic attacks.) Good luck economy!

A gentleman named “Larry” notes that Wells are “bastards” and “good for nothing scum bags.”

The upside and downside of being out of work for most of 2009 has been I’ve had time to look at our system of government and banking in a depth never before done by me. It’s depressing. The “powers that be” have gotten away with so much because families have had their heads down working hard to make a living. We have paid scant attention to the corruption stemming from Wall Street and Washington, D.C.

America IS a great country. Why has it come to this levels of abandonment of principles?

This was just sent to me. It IS time to take back our country and level the playing field.

For too long we have been too complacent about the workings of Congress. Many citizens had/have no idea that members of Congress can retire with the same pay after only one term, that they don’t pay into Social Security, that they specifically exempt themselves from many of the laws they pass (such as being exempt from any fear of prosecution for sexual harassment) while ordinary citizens must live under those laws.

The latest attempt in Congress is to exempt themselves from the Healthcare Reform that is being considered . . . in all of its forms.

Somehow, that doesn’t seem logical. We do not have an elite that is above the law. It does not matter if they are Democrat, Republican, Independent or whatever. The self-serving must stop. This is a good way to do that. It is an idea whose time has come.

Ask each person on your eMail list to contact a minimum of twenty people on their address list, in turn ask each of those to do likewise.

In three days, most people in The United States of America will have the message. This is one proposal that really should be passed around.

Proposed 28th Amendment to the United States Constitution:

“Congress shall make no law that applies to the citizens of the United States that does not apply equally to the Senators and/or Representatives; and, Congress shall make no law that applies to the Senators and/or Representatives that does not apply equally to the citizens of the United States.”

Dr. Seuss’ Did I Ever Tell You How Lucky You Are? (Classic Seuss)
A favorite economics lesson is from Dr. Seuss’ “Did I Ever Tell You How Lucky You Are?”

Oh, the jobs people work at! Out west, near Hawtch-Hawtch, there’s a Hawtch-Hawtcher Bee-Watcher. His job is to watch . . . to keep both his eyes on the lazy town bee. A bee that is watched will work harder, you see.

Well . . . he watched and he watched. But, in spite of his watch, that bee didn’t work any harder. Not mawtch.

So then somebody said, “Our old bee-watching man just isn’t bee-watching as hard as he can. He ought to be watched by another Hawtch-Hawtcher. The thing that we need is a Bee-Watcher-Watcher.”

WELL . . .The Bee-Watcher Watcher watched the Bee-Watcher. He didn’t watch well. So another Hawtch-Hawtcher had to come in as a Watch-Watcher-Watcher.

And today all the Hawtchers who live in Hawtch-Hawtch are watching on Watch-Watcher-Watchering-Watch, Watch-Watching the Watcher who’s watching that bee. You’re not a Hawtch-Hawtcher. You’re lucky you see.

Why are those at the heads of the investment banking businesses worldwide trying to convince us that this entire sink hole began only a year or so ago, when in fact the sink hole has been being positioned by those very actors, for decades. How and when did America become the “sloppy society?” The way our country is run is quite inelegant.

The following is from a variety of sources: “Treasury Inspector General for Tax Administration Recovery Act,” “Sovereign Society,” and a gentleman self-described as a “Disgruntled Republication.”

Federal workers owe more than $3B in back taxes
By STEPHEN OHLEMACHER (AP) – Dec 15, 2009

WASHINGTON — Federal workers owed the government more than $3 billion in back income taxes in 2008, just as federal tax revenues started to suffer from the recession.

More than 276,000 federal employees and retirees owed back income taxes as of Sept. 30, 2008, according to data from the Internal Revenue Service. The $3.04 billion owed was up from $2.7 billion owed by federal employees and retirees in 2007.

Among cabinet agencies, the Department of Housing and Urban Development had the highest delinquency rate, at just over 4 percent. The Treasury Department, which includes the IRS, had the lowest delinquency rate, at 0.98 percent.

Overall, the 9.7 million federal workers included in the data had a delinquency rate of about 2.9 percent.

“It’s not right for a few to shirk their obligations, and it’s especially offensive that these tax delinquencies come from federal employees and contractors,” said Sen. Chuck Grassley of Iowa, the top Republican on the Senate Finance Committee.

The IRS doesn’t provide a comparable delinquency rate for income taxes paid by the public. The nation’s overall compliance rate, which includes taxes paid by small businesses and corporations, has hovered around 85 percent for decades, according to IRS statistics.

Most residents who owe back income taxes file returns but cannot pay the full amount at tax time, said IRS spokesman Anthony Burke. Others have their tax bills increased through audits and cannot pay the higher bill.

The statistics on federal employees do not include those who are on payment plans. The IRS doesn’t publicize the data, but makes it available upon request. The data was first reported by Washington radio station WTOP.

The recession has put a big dent in federal tax receipts. Individual income tax receipts for the fiscal year that ended in September were down about 20 percent from the year before.

I recently discovered that the servicer of my mortgage made TWENTY-TWO mistakes (that I know of) during 2009 with regard to my mortgage! That, of course, pushed me into wondering what in the hell is going on? . . . the IRS has trouble even with routine tasks. According to another IG report, the agency has a staggering 70 percent error rate in its processing of taxpayer identification numbers for individual taxpayers:

The Treasury Inspector General for Tax Administration (TIGTA) today publicly released its review of the IRS’s processing of applications for Individual Taxpayer Identification Numbers (ITINs). TIGTA reviewed a sample of ITIN applications and found that almost 70% contained significant errors and/or raised concerns that should have prevented the issuance of an ITIN. The IRS estimates that it has issued more than 14 million ITINs as of December 2008. ITINs are intended to provide tax identification numbers to resident and nonresident alien individuals who may have U.S. tax reporting or filing obligations but do not qualify for Social Security Numbers, which generally are only issued to U.S. citizens and individuals legally admitted to the U.S. . . . ”The number of individual income tax returns filed using ITINs and reporting wage income has increased by 247 percent from 2001 to 2008,” commented J. Russell George, the Treasury Inspector General for Tax Administration. “If the IRS continues to issue ITINs without proper verification, the risk of fraudulently filed returns – along with fraudulently claimed refunds – will continue to rise,” added Inspector General George.

Everything by Dr. Seuss
Just think how much fun it will be when the IRS is in charge of determining those of us who should get fined or jailed for noncompliance with government-run healthcare! No wonder so many taxpayers put a flat tax or national sales tax on their Christmas lists.

Perhaps Dr. Seuss is our only hope . . . We’ve added a link to a collection of his books, including Dr. Geisel Goes Green (warnings against mindless progress), The Lorax, Mr. Brown Can Moo!, One Fish Two Fish Red Fish and others. The Economics of Dr. Seuss

The following is from a Facebook comment posted by an observant Realtor.

(Editor’s Note: I completely understand the frustration of trying to save one’s home and then losing it. However, I can’t understand destroying something you have loved because it is no longer yours . . . years ago I read Nikos Kazantzakis “Serpent and Lily,” wherein when the artist’s lover says she is leaving him, he kills her. That didn’t make sense. Destroying property does not make sense. There HAS to be a way to bring lenders to their knees but destroying homes isn’t, in part because they have insurance for everything.)

“I showed a home just prior to Christmas that, literally, had liquified feces on the wall used as a “writing” tool and aside from some very choice curse words, there was a very solid message to Litton Loan. While the act was irrational on the part of the former homeowner, what is clear is that they got in trouble and didn’t want to leave the home . . . that is the sad reality and I’ve seen dozens of home where the person being foreclosed on ceases to care and seeks to destroy out of anger and frustration.

“The issue is deep in this country. I don’t want to walk away from real estate after ten years because I don’t believe that homes and home ownership aren’t the foundation of the economy . . . because I do. I’m ready to hang it up because I don’t know if I can ethically and with a good conscience, tell someone to buy now or even during the course of the next year, without risking losing even more.

“I anticipate that, as long as the Congress is more hellbent on shoving healthcare reform down our throats, and spending trillions of dollars a year on poorly thought out plans that do nothing but devalue our currency . . . then we’re in for a very long, very ugly road as far as real estate is concerned.

“I’d almost rather go work at a job with benefits and a guaranteed paycheck and put aside money until homes are worth half or LESS than they are today.

“Mark my words . . . it will happen and right behind it . . . hyperinflation. All the economic indicators are there and the current administration will make Jimmy Carter look like an economic genius.”

Excerpted from the Wall St. Journal
Law Journal
December 24, 2009
Amir Efrati

Foreclosure Challenges Raise Questions About Judicial Role

A group of state and federal judges presiding over foreclosures are wiping away borrowers’ mortgage debt, invalidating foreclosure sales and even barring some foreclosures outright.

The decisions in recent months by a handful of judges in states including Massachusetts, New York and Texas mark a new phase in the judiciary’s battle to stem the rising tide of foreclosures by punishing mortgage companies for paperwork mistakes and alleged mistreatment of borrowers.

The number of judges taking such action remains small, and most foreclosures go through without a challenge . . . but the growing number of rulings against lenders’ claims is raising questions among some legal experts about judges’ impartiality . . .

As early as 18 months ago, several judges in California, New York, Ohio and elsewhere would dismiss foreclosure cases if they could find reason to do so . . . Now, after the country has been mired in a housing crisis for more than two years, more judges are calling these companies on their paperwork glitches, and in some cases going much further in their efforts to help homeowners.

It makes sense for judges to demand that mortgage companies follow the rules to the letter if they want to win foreclosure cases in court, says Raymond Brescia, an assistant professor at Albany Law School who has written about the role of the courts in the financial crisis. “I don’t think that’s a crazy idea,” he says. “To expect plaintiffs to prove their case is what the judicial system is founded on.”

But if judges decide to help borrowers in ways that overlook the merits of individual cases, Mr. Brescia adds, that would “undermine the integrity of the judiciary, and that’s not going to help anybody.” Instead, he says, it might trigger a backlash from legislators or regulators to rein in activist jurists.

At the heart of some of the court rulings is what became a common practice among mortgage companies: filing a foreclosure claim without showing proof that they actually own the mortgage and have the right to foreclose. This occurs in part because mortgages change hands multiple times after the original loan is made, but the mortgage documents and the contracts between borrowers and lenders are never altered to reflect those changes. Years later, it can be difficult to verify who is the owner of the mortgage.

That played a key role in a ruling in October by Keith Long, a state-court judge in Massachusetts. He invalidated two foreclosure sales that had occurred more than two years ago. The judge affirmed his own prior ruling that said units of U.S. Bancorp and Wells Fargo & Co. never had the right to sell the homes.

Judge Long ruled that even though the companies physically held the relevant mortgage documents, the mortgages were never legally assigned to them and recorded with the state.

“They’re selling something they don’t own,” says attorney Paul Collier, who began representing the borrowers in the case last year.

Walter H. Porr, a lawyer for the companies, which are appealing the ruling, says his clients “operated in what had been an accepted industry fashion for the better part of 15 or 20 years.” He adds: “We owned those mortgages.”

In October, a federal bankruptcy judge in White Plains, N.Y., rejected a claim by a mortgage company that the debtor owed $460,000. The judge, Robert D. Drain, said the company, PHH Mortgage Corp., couldn’t prove it owned the debt . . .

And in a prominent case in New York’s Suffolk County on Long Island, Jeffrey Spinner, a state-court judge, canceled $292,000 in mortgage debt after he ruled the borrowers were mistreated by IndyMac Bank (which) displayed “harsh, repugnant, shocking and repulsive” behavior by making no attempt to negotiate a settlement with Diane Yano-Horoski after she and her husband fell behind on payments, despite a state law requiring the company to try . . .

The full story from the Wall St. Journal

This is amazing. I saw Chase’s new site at Keeping Your Home.

Chase’s complaint record is not good — 282,000 as compared to Wells Fargo’s 300+ thousand and BofA’s numbers. Interesting ’cause Chase is not a top home lending institution and does not hold a comparable number of mortgages, so this indicates that they are in bad shape. Chase’s site HAS to be all PR, but it’s excellent PR, unless, of course, you can read through PR and its purpose. Chase rolled out earlier in 2009 on the West Coast of the Americas with a lame ad. Now they have nicely captured a face of America, albeit they are catering to Hispanics.

In any case, Chase will go on the list I contact re helping in Marin. And here’s a test I will try: “Concerned about paying your loan?” Of course, this refers to Chase, WaMu or EMC, however, I am going to test them. They do hold my second and they were polite when I first freaked about finances in December 2008. I’ll call Chase to see if they will take over the first and the second at 5% for 30 years fixed. What the hell. Chase says they have helped 750,000 foreclosures . . . I absolutely do NOT believe that . . . or perhaps their definition of “help” should needs defining.

I want to write a book entitled “You Can’t Tell Us Apart, Can You?” referring to “white” America. This because I am German Jew and Irish Catholic and do not relate to subjects of the Queen of England or the King of Spain, at certainly not any nation Denmark-north.

And because I often wonder what blacks, Hispanics, Iranians, Indians, etc. know about America and immigration. I decided early on that they most people are caught up in their own strife, don’t know, and don’t care much about anyone else.

A friend/associate, whom I adore, said this morning that it seems like we are fighting the Civil War, but admitted that he does not know what the Civil War was about. I explained that the North (under President Lincoln) wanted to abolish slavery, while the South wanted to maintain the black slaves and cheap labor for their plantations. He said, “Oh.”

What many people do not know is that plantations in the South and various Caribbean islands were also “maintaining” Irish (and probably other) “indentured slaves.” Indentured, of course, meaning once you pay off your debt you were free, however you could never pay off your debt so this was a lifetime commitment.

Bizarre what potentially losing one’s home digs up, don’t you think? My family has been in America since 1704 and here I am fighting for my rights. Absolutely bizarre.

A current favorite racial comment — this from a TV drama: The Iranian man said, “We can’t go anywhere. We can’t travel through airports. We can’t travel on subways. You look at us with suspicion at all turns. You check us for bombs.”

The black New York cop responded, “Yeah, but you can get a cab.”

The Bankers Manifesto of 1892
Distributed to a private group of elite bankers in June, 1892

The Black Book Adlai Stevenson, Adlai Stevenson II, and Adlai Stevenson III The Black Book is a primary source offering a glimpse into the minute inner workings of American politics over three generations. It began as a binder filled with anecdotes and maxims that county prosecutor, congressman, Assistant Postmaster General, and later U.S. Vice President Adlai E. Stevenson (1835-1914). He was known to jot down his thoughts on anything at hand, even menus, place cards, and napkins. The Black Book continues with writings by Governor Adlai E. Stevenson II (1900-1965) and Senator Adlai E. Stevenson (1930-). The Senator also provides commentary. The result is a treasure trove of insight into the American political machine, flavored with genuine personal convictions; the reader may agree or disagree with the expressed views, but cannot deny their authenticity, refreshing in today’s era of political sound bites and endless power mongering. “My definition of a free society is a society where it is safe to be unpopular. – Adlai II”. June, 2009 The Midwest Book Review

• “We (the bankers) must proceed with caution and guard every move made, for the lower order of the people are already showing signs of restless commotion. Prudence will therefore show a policity of apparently yielding to the popular will until our plans are so far consummated that we can declare our designs without any fear of any organized resistance.
• “The Farmers Alliance and Knights of Labor organizations in the United States should be carefully watched by our trusted men, and we must take immediate steps to control these organizations in our interest or disrupt them.
• “At the coming Omaha Convention to be held July 4, 1892, our men must attend and direct its movement, or else there will be set on foot such antagonism to our designs as may require force to overcome. This at the present time would be premature. We are not yet ready for such a crisis. Capital must protect itself in every possible manner through combination (conspiracy ) and legislation.
• “The courts must be called to our aid, debts must be collected, bonds and mortgages foreclosed as rapidly as possible.
• “When through the process of law, the common people have lost their homes, they will be more tractable and easily governed through the influence of the strong arm of government applied to a central power of imperial wealth under the control of the leading financiers. People without homes will not quarrel with their leaders.
• “History repeats itself in regular cycles. This truth is well known among our
  principal men who are engaged in forming an imperialism of the world. While they are doing this, the people must be kept in a state of political antagonism.
• “The question of tariff reform must be urged through the organization known as the Democratic Party, and the question of protection with the reciprocity must be be forced to view through the Republican Party.
• “By thus dividing voters, we can get them to expend their energies in fighting over questions of no importance to us, except as teachers to the common herd. Thus by discrete action, we can secure all that has been so gererously planned and successfully accomplished.”

The above was reprinted from the book, “Economic Pinch” written by the late Charles A. Lindberg, Sr. which was first published in 1923. The Banker’s Manifesto of June 1892 was not intended for public reading, but was propaganda to hold the big bankers together. Permission was not needed to reprint the above.

The Bankers Manifesto of 1934
Distributed to a private group of elite bankers in 1934

Capital must protect itself in every possible manner through combination and legislation. Debts must be collected, bonds and mortgages foreclosed as rapidly as possible. When through the process of law, the common people have lost their homes, they will be more tractable and easily governed through the influence of the strong arm of government applied to a central power of imperial wealth under the control of the leading financiers. People without homes will not quarrel with their leaders. This is well known among our principal mennow engaged in forming an imperialism of capital to govern the world. “By dividing the people we can get them to expend their energies in fighting over questions of no importance to us, except as teachers to the common herd. Thus by discrete action, we can secure all that has been so generously planned and successfully accomplished.”

The above was printed from the Banker’s Manifestofor private circulation among leader bankers only, taken from the Civil Servants’ yearbook.” The Organizer” of January, and the “New American” of February, 1934.

I know we are being manipulated but I couldn’t figure out why. And here it is:

When through the process of law, the common people have lost their homes, they will be more tractable and easily governed through the influence of the strong arm of government applied to a central power of imperial wealth under the control of the leading financiers. People without homes will not quarrel with their leaders.

That is IT, but now, next question, what is it that they do not want us to quarrel about? Their incomes? The lack of funds behind their incomes? Rising crime in America? What are they controlling us for? Out of habit? Or is there a reason?

This also helps explain the “Forbearance Agreements” being given by lenders to homeowners facing problems: The “Agreements” are unintelligible. I actually wrote to my lender today asking for a translation and although I’m sure it sounds as though I was being sarcastic, I was not. The agreement in the first paragraph is different than that in the second paragraph which is different than anything on the second page, and all is negated by the servicer of the loan writing that the lender (the entitly currently holding the note, whomever that might be) has not agreed to anything, may not agree to anything, and can foreclose on the house at any time without notice.

For the past year of dealing with my lender for a loan modification on my home, too often I wake up with bizarre questions (and equally bizarre images in my mind). Today’s question: What falls under the FBI’s definition of organized crime. Of course I am thinking of the white collar criminals running free in America.

And here are the relevant definitions:

Criminal Enterprise: The FBI defines a criminal enterprise as a group of individuals with an identified hierarchy, or comparable structure, engaged in significant criminal activity. These organizations often engage in multiple criminal activities and have extensive supporting networks. The terms Organized Crime and Criminal Enterprise are similar and often used synonymously. However, various federal criminal statutes specifically define the elements of an enterprise that need to be proven in order to convict individuals or groups of individuals under those statutes.

The Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations (RICO) statute, or Title 18 of the United States Code, Section 1961(4), defines an enterprise as “any individual, partnership, corporation, association, or other legal entity, and any union or group of individuals associated in fact although not a legal entity.”

The Continuing Criminal Enterprise statute, or Title 21 of the United States Code, Section 848(c)(2), defines a criminal enterprise as any group of six or more people, where one of the six occupies a position of organizer, a supervisory position, or any other position of management with respect to the other five, and which generates substantial income or resources, and is engaged in a continuing series of violations of subchapters I and II of Chapter 13 of Title 21 of the United States Code.

Ethics for Executives In the event you are a top level executive with questionable ethics who stumbled across this site, here is a link to a selection of books that we highly recommend you read. Apparently ethics courses are not mandatory in today’s business colleges . . . that is apparent, don’t you think?

Organized Crime: The FBI defines organized crime as any group having some manner of a formalized structure and whose primary objective is to obtain money through illegal activities. Such groups maintain their position through the use of actual or threatened violence, corrupt public officials, graft, or extortion, and generally have a significant impact on the people in their locales, region, or the country as a whole.

Once we get beyond giving free rides to those with advanced degrees, you will see many more white collar criminals in their proper place . . . which will be in jail right alongside Mr. Madoff. “Robbery” is included under state crimes. The illegal and/or lost paperwork locking you into your mortgage should come under “Robbery.”

Excerpted from The Sovereign Society2010: The Year of Institutionalized Theft

Balancing State & Local Budgets
With the Frightening Power of Civil Forfeiture
By Mark Nestmann

While the talking heads on television declare the recession over, state and local governments face record deficits and a shortage of viable solutions.

Arizona’s state budget, for example, represents more than 50% of anticipated 2010 revenues. And while Arizona faces perhaps the largest per-capita budget shortfall in the United States, many other states have a similar funding crisis.

Unfortunately, there are very few politically expedient ways to stem the flow of red ink. Raising taxes is not only politically unpopular, but threatens to further depress state and local economies. Cutting benefits is even less popular.

On the other hand, confiscating the “proceeds of crime” has a near-universal appeal. And using “civil forfeiture” statutes in effect in all 50 states, police have pursued this tactic aggressively.

Civil forfeiture is a legal procedure in which prosecutors can seize your property without accusing you – much less convicting you – of any crime.

Most federal civil forfeitures require the government to at least demonstrate probable cause that your property is somehow connected to a crime to confiscate it. But the federal rules don’t generally extend to state and local governments. In many states, the government can simply seize your property and wait months before allowing you to contest the forfeiture.

While The Soverign Society considers seizing your property as a bad thing, I can see cases where it might be a good thing and a means to get back that which has been stolen from taxpayers.

If you are a good and hardworking citizen, this is a nightmare and should not happen to you. However, if you are one of those questionable citizens who came to your wealth by cheating others . . . which is commonplace these days . . . well, one can only hope they seize everything you have just as you have done to others.