Financial Crisis

[midas]

If billionaires don't feel guilty about walking away from their debts, should homeowners?

if Nazis killed millions of Jews without feeling guilty, should you and me be allowed to kill each a single one?

If it was bankster and 12 D let me use his AK47- for me absolutely

[lannarebirth]

So you agree that when a bank sold the loan to a third party (Without mentioning the assignees) the mortgage taker can just walk away, no matter in which country the contract has been made?

Just asking.

Walking away is a separate issue Alex. The ability to do that is conditional on the language of the note. There are loans that are no recourse whereby the securitized collateral is the only damages a lienholder may seek. Recourse loans can allow lienholders to attach other assets or income of the debtor. Inevitably it will end up in court.

The thing is when going to court, one needs "standing". If the new lienholder is not the lienholder of record they have no standing (from my understanding) and I am not aware how they may bring an action. I'm sure there are court cases being prepared now to address this very issue. It will be interesting to see how they turn out.

Lana, examples here: http://www.endlessfrauddetection.com/modul...index.php?id=19

As you say you have spend a lot of time in this legalese stuff would you mind trying to answer a few questions I have?

They are related to finance and contracts but not necessarily with the "crisis" (but maybe they are).

I am not a lawyer Alex and I work in small niche market whereby I provide individuals funding if they provide sufficient security in the form of real property. I am somewhat familiar with mortgages, Deeds Of Trust, Real Estate Contracts, reconveyance documents, etc. I am not an expert, but you can post your questions if you like. If it's something I know I'll tell you.

edit: That link you posted highlights my earlier comments about "standing". What a mess.

Edited December 26, 2009 by lannarebirth

[Naam]

If billionaires don't feel guilty about walking away from their debts, should homeowners?

if Nazis killed millions of Jews without feeling guilty, should you and me be allowed to kill each a single one?

If it was bankster and 12 D let me use his AK47- for me absolutely

if i say "i might join you" would you hold it against me?

[Naam]

If billionaires don't feel guilty about walking away from their debts, should homeowners?

if Nazis killed millions of Jews without feeling guilty, should you and me be allowed to kill each a single one?

Will they be bankers?

:D

[lannarebirth]

If billionaires don't feel guilty about walking away from their debts, should homeowners?

if Nazis killed millions of Jews without feeling guilty, should you and me be allowed to kill each a single one?

If it was bankster and 12 D let me use his AK47- for me absolutely

Some people "need kiliin' ". I'd start with the politicians and then move to the bankers, but that's just me.

[Naam]

If billionaires don't feel guilty about walking away from their debts, should homeowners?

if Nazis killed millions of Jews without feeling guilty, should you and me be allowed to kill each a single one?

If it was bankster and 12 D let me use his AK47- for me absolutely

Some people "need kiliin' ". I'd start with the politicians and then move to the bankers, but that's just me.

we could act in parallel ways and simultaneously. have you ever read Clausewitz? even now after more than a century a literature must for officers in dozens of armies. adding General Guderian's credo "klotzen, nicht kleckern!" would add to the odds of success.

[lannarebirth]

Some people "need kiliin' ". I'd start with the politicians and then move to the bankers, but that's just me.

we could act in parallel ways and simultaneously. have you ever read Clausewitz? even now after more than a century a literature must for officers in dozens of armies. adding General Guderian's credo "klotzen, nicht kleckern!" would add to the odds of success.

No I have not read his books on war making, but I gather he feels that wars are a natural extension of political policy. That very idea is repugnant to me, but I haven't seem anything in my 52 years that says it's a false notion.

Well, I had to translate the good Generals remarks. Something like "slog away, do not make a mess", from the free translator. Something like "make it big" from another site. If he's for making iot big and not leaving amess, than I can endorse those remarks.

[midas]

If billionaires don't feel guilty about walking away from their debts, should homeowners?

if Nazis killed millions of Jews without feeling guilty, should you and me be allowed to kill each a single one?

If it was bankster and 12 D let me use his AK47- for me absolutely

if i say "i might join you" would you hold it against me?

never !!! if join me all your past " transgressions " in this thread will be forgiven

[midas]

If billionaires don't feel guilty about walking away from their debts, should homeowners?

if Nazis killed millions of Jews without feeling guilty, should you and me be allowed to kill each a single one?

If it was bankster and 12 D let me use his AK47- for me absolutely

Some people "need kiliin' ". I'd start with the politicians and then move to the bankers, but that's just me.

Only in the Knesset or everywhere ?

[lannarebirth]

Some people "need kiliin' ". I'd start with the politicians and then move to the bankers, but that's just me.

Only in the Knesset or everywhere ?

I don't think the Knesset at all. I would start with those legislators in whichever countries that allowed corporate interests to hold the citizens of their nations fiscally responsible for the fallout from their unbridled greed. As I'm an American citizen I guess I'd want to start there.

[flying]

we could act in parallel ways and simultaneously.

That would be my suggestion also

No use in giving notice to others ......

Also so none feel singled out

Edited December 26, 2009 by flying

[midas]

Some people "need kiliin' ". I'd start with the politicians and then move to the bankers, but that's just me.

Only in the Knesset or everywhere ?

I don't think the Knesset at all. I would start with those legislators in whichever countries that allowed corporate interests to hold the citizens of their nations fiscally responsible for the fallout from their unbridled greed. As I'm an American citizen I guess I'd want to start there.

But if you want to get rid of some weeds, you have to pull them up by the roots

http://us.macmillan.com/theisraellobbyandusforeignpolicy

[AlexLah]

Quote Lana:

I am not a lawyer Alex and I work in small niche market whereby I provide individuals funding if they provide sufficient security in the form of real property. I am somewhat familiar with mortgages, Deeds Of Trust, Real Estate Contracts, re conveyance documents, etc. I am not an expert, but you can post your questions if you like. If it's something I know I'll tell you.

Thanks Lana,

My question is: Why is it that in (legal) documents a name is written in all capitol and/or addressed as (for example) Mr./Mrs/Ms? (I refer to Ens legis)

Some of you might be thinking what is Alex smoking to be asking this kind of question but I can assure you that if I am correct in my assumptions

something interesting could be revealed.

[lannarebirth]

Some people "need kiliin' ". I'd start with the politicians and then move to the bankers, but that's just me.

Only in the Knesset or everywhere ?

I don't think the Knesset at all. I would start with those legislators in whichever countries that allowed corporate interests to hold the citizens of their nations fiscally responsible for the fallout from their unbridled greed. As I'm an American citizen I guess I'd want to start there.

But if you want to get rid of some weeds, you have to pull them up by the roots

http://us.macmillan.com/theisraellobbyandusforeignpolicy

I'm not interested in a progrom, I'm interested in justice. Everyone seeks to curry influence, some are better at it than others. They would all make little headway if politicians did not sell their influence and kept the interests of their constituents foremost in their actions.

Edited December 27, 2009 by lannarebirth

[lannarebirth]

Quote Lana:

I am not an expert, but you can post your questions if you like. If it's something I know I'll tell you.

Thanks Lana,

My question is: Why is it that in (legal) documents a name is written in all capitol and/or addressed as (for example) Mr./Mrs/Ms? (I refer to Ens legis)

Some of you might be thinking what is Alex smoking to be asking this kind of question but I can assure you that if I am correct in my assumptions

something interesting could be revealed.

The answer to your question Alex, is that I do not know. I await your revelations.

Here's what the "ask a lawyer" website said:

http://webtradecenter-legal-forms.com/746/...es-capitalized/

[Naam]

My question is: Why is it that in (legal) documents a name is written in all capitol and/or addressed as (for example) Mr./Mrs/Ms? (I refer to Ens legis)

Some of you might be thinking what is Alex smoking to be asking this kind of question but I can assure you that if I am correct in my assumptions something interesting could be revealed.

to the best of my knowledge it is a basic requirement that all U.S. legal documents are written in the capitol because the capitol, being the seat of the Federal Government's legislature, is very important from a legal point of view. one can also assume that Washington wouldn't be the capital of the Greatest Nation on Earth™ without the capitol.

adding Mr/Mrs/Ms is quite important too to differentiate between genders because of all them transsexuals running around nowadays. i think it is to avoid the possibility that Ms. Applebee applies and cashes in a mortgage, doesn't pay and when the lender sues for the payments Ms. Applebee flashes his pecker and says with a broad grin "must be some mix-up. i am actually Mr. Applebee who never took no money of no mortgage ever from you."

[midas]

Alex, you posted about this subject in the past – did you see this one yet ?

Detroit in RUINS! (Crowder goes Ghetto)

The “ trend ” is obvious………

1 ) An AUW worker earns $130,000 per annum with SEVEN weeks paid holiday.

2 ) A skilled Tata motors worker gets UP TO 480,000.00 INR = 10,312.55 USD per annum

3 ) In China a skilled auto worker can earn 3,880.00 CNY Per month = 568.101 USD = $ 6820 per annum

[flying]

Uncle Sam Plays Santa Claus

By Greg Hunter

The government has made some pretty big financial announcements during the Christmas holiday. So-called Pay Czar, Kenneth Feinberg, decided to boost the pay of an unnamed AIG executive by $4.3 million. Was Feinberg just playing Santa or taking strategic action to get the least attention possible while the media was busy with Christmas and snow storms ? I’m going with taking strategic action to get the least attention possible. How about you? I guess it is a little hard to justify giving some executive a $4 million raise while more than 15 million people are out of work. The Pay Czar said the multimillion dollar raise was in line with other executives at AIG, and it was hard to retain “top talent” without such a big boost. Is this the same “talent” that helped bankrupt the company? Taxpayers who spent more than $180 billion propping up this failed company don’t even get to know the name of the person getting the raise. Feinberg sited “privacy restrictions” for the secrecy. We get to know the salary of the President of the United States but not this executive? Outrageous!!! This just backs up the point I made two weeks ago that the “Pay Czar” is just a public relations move. It is just a ploy to appease an angry public over Wall Street pay at firms bailed out by the government. Check out my post called “Pay Czar” Idea is a Crock!

In other Uncle Sam Santa Claus news, the government announced the two top executives at failed mortgage giants Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac will each get 6 million bucks to run these bankrupt businesses. Fannie and Freddie should have been taken straight to receivership and shut down, not pay two Wall Street weasels to keep these money losing companies afloat. Again, another announcement just before Christmas. The administration must think this is a great time to release an unpopular story.

That brings me to the biggest government Christmas present of all. The Treasury lifted the limit on financial aid available to Fannie and Freddie on Christmas Eve. There was a $400 billion cap on money to keep these giant money suckers in business, now the bailout goes to infinity. Last year when Fannie and Freddie became insolvent, the government took them over in the largest nationalization in U.S. history. Back then, the Treasury said it would cost the taxpayers $100 billion each. The maximum taxpayer cost would be $200 million. Taxpayers have already spent more than $111 billion propping them both up. So what gives with lifting the limits to infinity? I’d say 2009 and 2010 are going to deliver some pretty big losses to the failed mortgage giants. There is no way that the United States won’t get hit with big inflation at the very least.

Barack Obama has repeatedly talked about lowering the deficit. I don’t see how playing Santa Claus is going to accomplish this. If you want to shrink the deficit, then you have to play Scrooge! That would mean big losses to the rich and real sacrifice for most Americans. That is not going to happen, especially with midterm elections just 10 months away. We live in an age where good work and competence are penalized and failure and incompetence are rewarded.

[12DrinkMore]

Alex, you posted about this subject in the past – did you see this one yet ?

Detroit in RUINS! (Crowder goes Ghetto)

The “ trend ” is obvious………

1 ) An AUW worker earns $130,000 per annum with SEVEN weeks paid holiday.

2 ) A skilled Tata motors worker gets UP TO 480,000.00 INR = 10,312.55 USD per annum

3 ) In China a skilled auto worker can earn 3,880.00 CNY Per month = 568.101 USD = $ 6820 per annum

This is globalisation, a process that is evolving rapidly and will create a lot of pain for a lot of people. It is very evident here in Thailand, the number of affluent Asian tourists is increasing very quickly, and the number of Western tourists is diminishing, and those who do come are spending less.

So they want to resurrect the 1933 Glass-Steagall Act.

http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=206...vHpo&pos=10

And no need to guess who is against it. But it seems so obvious that it was a good idea, separating the gamblers from the state supported traditional bankers.

But we are on the way up,

Household spending “will pick up steam as we move into the second half of 2010,” said Maki, 44, who topped all 60 forecasters in the Bloomberg News ranking of gross domestic product projections for the first three quarters of 2009. “The overall picture for 2010 will be an economy growing rapidly enough to bring down the unemployment rate” to an average of 9.6 percent.

Maki, who specialized in researching household finances at the Fed from 1995 to 2000, said the economic recovery this time will be similar to past rebounds. Consumer purchases improved after last year’s 61 percent plunge in gasoline prices and will keep growing in 2010, reflecting the surge in stocks. Faster growth will push Treasury yields higher and help the dollar strengthen as the Fed raises interest rates, he predicts.

http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=206...917s&pos=11

The issue I have is that "previous rebounds" occurred in a totally different world economy, and that the mess we a are now in is not comparable to previous economic downturns.

But just a few days away from twenty ten or two thousand and ten, whatever takes your preference. And may all of us have a prosperous year, with the exception of the bankers and the politicians on both sides of the Atlantic.

[flying]

But we are on the way up,

Household spending “will pick up steam as we move into the second half of 2010,” said Maki, 44, who topped all 60 forecasters in the Bloomberg News ranking of gross domestic product projections for the first three quarters of 2009. “The overall picture for 2010 will be an economy growing rapidly enough to bring down the unemployment rate” to an average of 9.6 percent.

The issue I have is that "previous rebounds" occurred in a totally different world economy, and that the mess we a are now in is not comparable to previous economic downturns.

It is almost as if there is more than one USA that they report about.

As much as I would prefer to live in the place that your quote depicts...The reality here seems closer to this.....

The banking system is not lending money because it's still insolvent. The people, having lost over 5 trillion dollars in the real estate bust are also collectively insolvent. Many US states and cities are bankrupt or near bankrupt. One in nine Americans subsist on food stamps. Even as a college education has become unaffordable to most Americans, college graduates now find themselves jobless. One in seven households now have their adult children living back at home due to the inability to find a job. The homeless population is growing and tent cities sprouted up across America during 2009. The estimated homeless population in LA alone is 40,000 people a night. People in the US if they have a job are working longer and harder to make the same income. Wages have remained stagnant and the real cost of living continues to spiral ever higher for ordinary Americans. The new man in charge, elected on a platform of "change", has delivered his change in the form of change=no change, or how do you like your change now?

By any metric you choose, whether it's the median home costing half the median income even at artificially low interest rates, to the ballooning cost of insurance, healthcare, education or anything else people spend their money on, the US is experiencing a rapid decline in the standard of living for ordinary Americans and an emerging ultra rich ultra powerful shadow oligarch rule amid a generalized and widespread financial and social decay. The US population is becoming a nation of voiceless serfs with fewer and fewer remaining civil and property rights and a rapidly decaying standard of living, the antitheses of everything America is said to represent and strive for.

http://earthblognews.blogspot.com/

Edited December 28, 2009 by flying

[Naam]

"The people, having lost over 5 trillion dollars in the real estate bust are also collectively insolvent."

would any kind soul please explain to me why a loss in book value makes people insolvent? does book value equal liquidity? at which famous university is this theory taught? hmmm... i just realised it's the famous Blogspot University

[flying]

"The people, having lost over 5 trillion dollars in the real estate bust are also collectively insolvent."

would any kind soul please explain to me why a loss in book value makes people insolvent? does book value equal liquidity? at which famous university is this theory taught? hmmm...

Not sure how it is for them but....I know folks who rely on their assets as a means of leverage. They seem rich but hold very little in actual liquid assets. They rely heavily on the value of their assets to leverage various working capital lines/lines of credit.

Happy to say I am not of that group. Which is probably why they seem or use to seem richer than I at least on paper

[Naam]

"The people, having lost over 5 trillion dollars in the real estate bust are also collectively insolvent."

would any kind soul please explain to me why a loss in book value makes people insolvent? does book value equal liquidity? at which famous university is this theory taught? hmmm...

Not sure how it is for them but....I know folks who rely on their assets as a means of leverage. They seem rich but hold very little in actual liquid assets. They rely heavily on the value of their assets to leverage various working capital lines/lines of credit.

it is correct that a lot of Americans used the difference in value when refinancing their homes to spend it. but i strongly doubt that the average American used the cash for any financial leveraging. he/she just blew it, not even knowing what leverage means or how it is done.

[flying]

it is correct that a lot of Americans used the difference in value when refinancing their homes to spend it. but i strongly doubt that the average American used the cash for any financial leveraging. he/she just blew it, not even knowing what leverage means or how it is done.

The one I talked to most when I did some project management for him did quite well.

He ran a 70 million a year in sales distribution but like I said all of his working capital came from credit lines based on his commercial properties.

He was an older Japanese man American citizen but I always thought it was both odd & interesting....his ways I mean.

One of his favorite saying was also OPM ( other peoples money ) when discussing new joint ventures.

I will admit though that while he was young he did very well but when he was older (83) I could never get over his ability to buy what I considered real dogs of properties. But it did give me work

[Abrak]

"The people, having lost over 5 trillion dollars in the real estate bust are also collectively insolvent."

would any kind soul please explain to me why a loss in book value makes people insolvent? does book value equal liquidity? at which famous university is this theory taught? hmmm... i just realised it's the famous Blogspot University

The statement is pretty dodgy in any case. According to the Fed Reserve at the end of September 2009 - US household mortgages were US$10.3trn, US household real estate worth Us$16.5trn and US disposable annual income US$11trn.

[Naam]

"The people, having lost over 5 trillion dollars in the real estate bust are also collectively insolvent."

would any kind soul please explain to me why a loss in book value makes people insolvent? does book value equal liquidity? at which famous university is this theory taught? hmmm... i just realised it's the famous Blogspot University

The statement is pretty dodgy in any case. According to the Fed Reserve at the end of September 2009 - US household mortgages were US$10.3trn, US household real estate worth Us$16.5trn and US disposable annual income US$11trn.

what else is to expect from "blogspots"?

[flying]

"The people, having lost over 5 trillion dollars in the real estate bust are also collectively insolvent."

would any kind soul please explain to me why a loss in book value makes people insolvent? does book value equal liquidity? at which famous university is this theory taught? hmmm... i just realised it's the famous Blogspot University

The statement is pretty dodgy in any case. According to the Fed Reserve at the end of September 2009 - US household mortgages were US$10.3trn, US household real estate worth Us$16.5trn and US disposable annual income US$11trn.

I guess your right especially since they (FED) also claimed households bought 500 billion in treasuries, 35x last years amount...must have been a great year...or....someone is fibbing eh?

[teletiger]

Quite right Herr Naam. Thank God that idiot Willem Buiter was forced to give up blogging when he went over to the dar........err, joined Citi.

That would also explain his curious rant against buying gold, a few weeks ago.

Regards.

[Abrak]

I guess your right especially since they (FED) also claimed households bought 500 billion in treasuries, 35x last years amount...must have been a great year...or....someone is fibbing eh?

Actually this is little more than an 'accounting adjustment' (it has also distorted M2 numbers).

In 2008 household deposits increased US$500bn and household treasuries were broadly unchanged. In 2009 household deposits fell US$130bn and US$ treasury holdings increased US$500bn (as at 9m 2009).

This reflected a decline in money market funds (included in deposits/M2, but with maturities of an average of about 3 months) as well as very low bank deposit rates which pushed households to 'look for yield' in the longer maturity market through USTs (not included in deposits/M2).

[flying]

I guess your right especially since they (FED) also claimed households bought 500 billion in treasuries, 35x last years amount...must have been a great year...or....someone is fibbing eh?

Actually this is little more than an 'accounting adjustment' (it has also distorted M2 numbers).

In 2008 household deposits increased US$500bn and household treasuries were broadly unchanged. In 2009 household deposits fell US$130bn and US$ treasury holdings increased US$500bn (as at 9m 2009).

This reflected a decline in money market funds (included in deposits/M2, but with maturities of an average of about 3 months) as well as very low bank deposit rates which pushed households to 'look for yield' in the longer maturity market through USTs (not included in deposits/M2).

http://www.scribd.com/doc/24470953/Sprott-December

Is it the same?