Everyone Else Knows: Why Do We Continue To Ignore It?

Featured Products and Services by The Garfield Firm


LivingLies Membership – If you are not already a member, this is the time to do it, when things are changing.

For Customer Service call 1-520-405-1688

Editor’s Comment:

In a short article by Patrick Jenkins in the Financial Times (Doubts Over Lending Push), it seems that everyone in Europe understands the problem well, and that the the consequences are dire but are unsure about what to do about it. Here in the United States housing is the elephant in the living room that nobody really wants to talk about. European leaders don’t like talking about it either but they are doing it anyway. Maybe they actually care what happens next unlike American politicians who seem to enjoy creating catastrophes, then handing power over to the other party and blaming them for the results.

Mitt Romney and Barack Obama are battling it out over economic policies and whether lower taxes and fiscal stimulus will benefit the economy. Mitt wants to cut what is left of federal and state spending thus deepening the depression or recession or whatever it is. Barack wants to stimulate economic growth with more money. How about this: they are both wrong. And the Europeans, for all their chaotic political intrigues, are zooming in on the cure a lot faster than we are because we won’t even talk about it.

Both candidates seem to think that cheaper money and more of it delivered to the banks and large corporations will stimulate borrowing and commerce. But Graeme Leach, chief economist at the Institute of Directors boiled it down to one simple sentence: “Companies alarmed by the euro crisis will not be eager to borrow, regardless of the cost.” It is obviously obvious to anyone with a brain that companies are not going to borrow unless they think they need the money.

And they are not going to think they need the money unless demand is going up. With unemployment topping out near Great Depression levels, why would anyone think that commerce can be revived? Add in the fact that real wages have declined over the last 30 years and you can easily see why companies won’t borrow unless they think they can make money increasing their debt burden. Who does the buying — fairies? It’s consumers, stupid, and they are broke, tapped out on credit, and have very little confidence in their prospects.

The Europeans actually understand that there is a difference between the real economy and the one reported in the newspapers. The real one is where a strong middle class has savings and resources and they buy things. The one in the newspapers is all about paper and trades with companies buying and selling each other and “bets” being made on who is right about bonds, stocks and other crazy financial “innovations.”

Virtually half of the GDP published by Washington is made up of paper trades where the typical citizen is left out of the equation altogether. So here is a repeat of my prediction regarding the stock market: either it will “crash” in a correction that is congruent with actual commerce levels or the financial institutions and rating agencies will continue to rate and recommend securities of companies whose substance is gone —- called zombies in the FI article.

BOA is one such Zombie institution. It’s broke. Everyone knows it’s broke and yet they persist on pretending that it is just fine. Then they want consumers to express confidence in the economy or government. Why should they?

Everyone understands that the problem is housing and the fraudulent printing of “money” by private banks dwarfing any real money supply that is supplied by world governments. $700 TRILLION is traded as cash equivalents while world governments, even with quantitative easing have issued less than $70 TRILLION in real currency. Why would anyone think that taxes or stimulus or quantitative easing (printing money) could even nick the side of this barn. We are being forced to sustain a false tree of money on which thousands of branches are hanging onto a trunk that is not there and never was. Fear is now the dominant word that describes the behavior of world leaders and the leaders of central banks.

Here is the solution and it is the application of justice at the same time: since the mortgage papers contained lies and did not disclose the identity of the lender nor the actual terms of repayment, there is no law in existence that would allow such a transaction to become  an encumbrance on the land.

Add to that the fact that the transaction recited never took place because the borrower was actually doing business with a stranger where money DID exchange hands but was never documented, and you have the answer: the mortgages are invalid, the notes are invalid and the the banks having been already paid several times over for a loss they never incurred but instead foisted upon pension funds and sovereign wealth funds from other nations, let’s call it a day.

I don’t care if people get an unfair advantage or perk for being a victim in this scheme. I don’t care if this interferes with the ideology of personal responsibility (which is being ignorantly applied to this situation). I care about the country, our society and what will happen if our economy can’t come up off the ground. I care that too many people are underemployed or unemployed. I care that average savings are zero and that most Americans have suffered a grievous loss of wealth.

I care that there are not enough people to buy things because they don’t have any money. Rescind the so-called mortgage transactions, let the branches of derivatives and credit default swaps and other bets and enhancements fall to the ground. It’s not as bad as you think. Most of the bets settle out to zero exchanges because with certain exceptions the bets are balanced.

The world will not end if we give homeowners their homes free and clear of any encumbrance. The governments could even prosper if they took an interest in those mortgages they already purchased (or think they purchased) and imposed a fair mortgage with fair terms based upon realistic current market conditions in housing and finance. Then people would be returned to their former status in far less time, the rate of commerce would improve, the real economy would recover and the fake economy and the people who go with it can take a hike or go to jail, if we dare to put them there.





33 Responses

  1. […] Read more… Posted in Banks, MERS, News Around The Country, States « Foreclosures Up Again: Who Will Turn The Switch Off? HAWAII Foreclosure Help from Mandelman Matters – START HERE » You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site. […]

  2. HAMP is the prime mechanization for used to manufacture a default.
    It happen to me…and I need to explain how the mystery works for the court.
    I file a complaint with the OCC and Consumer Financial Protection Bureau Case Number: 120513-000028

    In response to Consumer Complaints, a ledger was submitted in MARCH of 2012 by Terry Rains Jr., Attorney for Wells Fargo, on behalf of the office of the President of Wells Fargo.
    However, Rains, blacked out the two columns which showed the HAMP payments funds going in and out of “debtor unapplied suspense account” during the three HAMP Trial Periods spanning a year. Because Rains had used a computer and not a black “Sharpie” pen, I was able to scan the ledger and use Photo Shop to lift enough pixels to read the figures.
    The figures revealed shows possible misappropriation of funds/payments into an “UNAPPLIED SUSPENSE ACCOUNT” The ledger shows I was charged additional late fees and a $450.00, foreclosure assessment fee, even before the lift of stay was submitted or granted, to the bankruptcy court. This piece of information points to misrepresentation to both me and the bankruptcy court as fact.

    HAMP was not officially set to start until APRIL 13th of 2009; Servicing banks were allowed to enroll homeowners well before start date of APRIL 13 2009. I was sent a Letter of Approval dated APRIL 15, 2009.

    i was sucked into the HAMP vortex when in Nov of 08, when i received a notice from the local Wells Fargo Bank that it was 2 weeks late(my ex was court ordered to make the payments & in contempt of court; he had stopped…and didn’t tell me.) I called WF and explained the situation, attempting to make payment arrangements.
    I was solicited HAMP as the solution. So from Nov of 08 to the 1st HAMP payment due MAY 1st. 135 days had passed.
    I wasn’t in default when I first called, but, now I was – due to an arbitrary imposed delay.
    My story took many twists and turns as WF imposed ridiculous and false “HAMP requirements” I did every one of them – at least 8 overnight mailings, hundreds of documented calls emails and over 60 faxes, some were faxed directly from the local WF bank to WFHM loss mid dept. by the bank managers with cover letters explaining the paperwork had already been faxed in. and WFHM still “lost” it.
    So i was denied for “non receipt of paperwork” Bla..Bla.. Bla.. .
    long story short, i get a knock on the door one morning, yep, Wells had auction my home without proper notice, of course… That was MAY 16th of 2011. it was REOed back to FHLMC -Freddie Mac. surprise!!!…they were the only bid.. credit bid that is.
    A year later, I’m still in my home. FHLMC filed to evict and i fought it. I lost to summary judgment . I appealed and was granted a TRO with a $500 bond to the court…I did it Pro Se…but I’m over my head and need a Pro Bono attorney here in Idaho.

    Prayers help. I believe God hears and sees what has been done and is grieved by the suffering all this blatant greed has caused the defenseless. He has gone before me.
    I am nobody to the banks and the courts, but I and you, are not a nobody to God.
    It is He who has given me the right to inhabit the space I occupy.
    Therefore, I have a responsibility to occupy the space I inhabit…
    God Bless you all in the fight.

    The lyrics to Denae Gardner’s new “Welcome to America” music video has become my fighting anthem. It was shot here in Idaho.
    Peg Butcher

  3. @enraged – clearly some people are sorely pi$$ed by ‘false default’ and while I can believe it happened, I for one don’t understand it, how it was done, etc. I doubt anyone will find an unobscure book called “False Defaults” and be able to take the info to a court. If a case is to be made, someone is going to have to do a lot of digging, just like others dig at that which interests them. I don’t know a court who would listen to any argument without some kind of foundation. And I don’t envy anyone who wants to take it on, because it looks like a massive amt of work.

  4. Craig Hulet – there is no Gold at Fort Knox

  5. How on earth do you lose that much gold? You have a contractual right to receive delivery from Lehman.

  6. “We’re seen the worst”—-????

  7. often the state civil law that allows treble and/or punitive damages incorporates the theft by deception criminal statutes by rference

  8. Thank you, dcb—
    Yes, I would like triple damages please…since the servicer deceived me by saying that my “loan” was “securitized” and then sold my house with the help of a foreclosure mill who said my current “creditor/lender” was Deutsche—who is merely the trustee of the securitized trust…(that did NOT have my “securitized loan”.) Meanwhile payoff check is made out to OneWest Bank—a debt collector.

  9. Actually intentional taking is theft by deception which is usually eligible for triple damages –3 times the value of the stolen property

  10. @J.G.,

    Irritatingly obscur. I don’t need to read something as painful as that to know that many people’s payments were misapplied. Those people were put into default and they lost their house. Whether intentional or negligently done, the result is the same.

  11. The article I posted continues; I quit copying.
    Carie, I suspect some of the answers you need about subprime ‘false defaults’ are to be found in specific (bank) accounting principles and then see where any bs, illegitimate deviation occurred, assuming these were not the loan-participation theory I suggested last year or so from my own limited and cursory info on participations). The author of this article, for instance, is probably easy to find (see info at website if interested – he has his own website, I think). He is an analyst and might be a good guy, might actually spend some time with you on the phone. If not, how about your friendly local accountant? I’ve directed this at you because I think you’d be happy and might even need to get to the bottom of this. If it’s true, you could expose it factually if you wanted.

  12. @anyone who believes loans were put into false default for untoward purposes:
    the beginning of an article by Tom Brown, March 29, 2009 at:


    “First-quarter earnings reports will shortly be upon us. Given what banks have been going through over the past year, the coming reporting season will be more important than usual,
    particularly since some large banks have already said that their results were decent for the first two months. Investors, as is their wont, will be especially interested in credit trends. But, oddly, not many analysts do a good job analyzing a given bank’s credit picture.
    Too many rely on bogus analytical shortcuts, such as comparing reserve levels to nonperforming loans (I’ll explain why that makes no sense in a minute.) Others focus too much on increases in
    nonperforming assets or on net chargeoffs.
    In any event, in analyzing a bank’s credit picture, it can be easy to arrive at conclusions that are misleading or just plain wrong. To help you avoid that, I hereby present the following primer on loan loss reserves. Don’t sigh. It might seem tedious now, but it should
    help you a lot as you go through bank earnings reports in coming weeks and read the associated misguided commentary from some analysts.
    To begin with, let’s define some terms:
    First, the loan loss reserve (or allowance for loan losses) is a contra-asset account on a bank’s balance sheet that is netted against gross loans. Each quarter the loan loss reserve
    rises by the amount of the loan loss provision (an expense item; more about it in a minute) and reduced by the level of net chargeoffs.
    Second, the loan loss provision is an expense item that adds to (or can subtract from) the loan loss reserve. It’s determined after management reviews its loan book and determines the
    appropriate level of reserves. At some banks, at some point in the economic cycle, loan loss provision can even be negative, meaning it can add to pre-tax income.

    **Third, non-accrual loans are generally loans that are 90 days past due, not deemed in the process of collection. A loan can be placed on non-accrual status before it becomes 90 days
    past due if certain factors indicate it will become so in the future.**

    “Non-accrual” means the bank no longer accrues interest from these loans into income even if, technically, the loan is still paying. In those cases, banks can either take the cash received into earnings or apply it to reduce the principal balance. Most banks don’t disclose the amount of cash interest received from non-accual loans each quarter, although we strongly encourage them to
    do so. Such disclosure would be a helpful indicator of the quality of a bank’s non-accrual book. (Wells Fargo provided such information to its great advantage during the last credit cycle.)
    Fourth, impaired loans are a subset of non-accrual loans. They tend to be larger commercial loans (size varies by bank) which have established probable and observable credit weakness.
    Impaired loans are accounted for under FAS 114 (more on this later).
    Fifth, restructured loans are loans whose original terms have been changed. Loans that have been restructured to a below-market rate will stay classified as restructured until they are
    paid off. Loans restructured to a market rate will be returned to the performing category once they’ve stayed current for a given period, typically six months. Most banks take cash received on restructured loans into income.
    Sixth, non-performing loans are the sum of non-accrual and restructured loans. It is important for analysts to distinguish between non-accrual loans, impaired loans, and
    restructured loans, since potential future losses can vary significantly among the categories.
    Seventh, net chargeoffs are the difference between a bank’s gross chargeoffs and any recoveries (partial or full) on loans where cash proceeds exceed the written down value of the loan as part of a settlement. A bank’s net chargeoffs are subtracted from its loan loss reserve, or added if there are net recoveries. Eighth, other nonperforming assets are assets the bank has taken possession, typically through foreclosure. Expenses paid to maintain these assets (property taxes, for instance) are operating expenses, as are any writedowns or losses from the assets’ disposition. Losses
    from other nonperforming assets (also called Other Real Estate Owned, or OREO) cannot be deducted from the loan loss reserve because they are not loans.
    Finally, nonperforming assets are the sum of nonperforming loans plus other non-performing assets.
    O.K. With terms out of the way, let’s see how all this can work—and how it can vary from bank to bank. Table 1, below, shows the non-performing loans and assets at First Horizon and Fifth Third over the last three years….”

  13. The death of a few financial piranas doesn’t elicit the same response in me as the deaths of innocent homeowners who were driven to their actions by psychopaths lacking the ability to emotionally connect with other humans–the financial piranas. I like the “heads on spikes” idea. Guantanamo is way too good for ’em. They get healthcare there and regular meals, so sharpen up a few sticks and set them in concrete on wall street where Dimon, Moynihan, Geitner and Bernanke can see the points from their office window.

  14. “The governments could even prosper if they took an interest in those mortgages they already purchased (or think they purchased) and imposed a fair mortgage with fair terms based upon realistic current market conditions in housing and finance.” We don’t need to worry about governments prospering. They are hiding trillions and trillions of dollars from the public.

    What we should be worrying about is how to get rid of all the deeply entrenched politicians and their corrupt government so that working people, product producers, growers, seamstresses, electricians, alternative energy system builders, building contractors–in short everyone who isn’t a blood sucking parasite who extracts their income off the back of those who actually work everyday–get them back to work through micro lending and community funded ventures so that the economy can get well on the bottom level. Turn over the money hidden from the public on the CAFR to the people it belongs to, the taxpayers who have been robbed blind by a government that snickers behind our backs and votes itself bigger, more powerful and more corrupt with each passing term. Taxes and more taxes are levied by this insatiable, unstoppable juggernaut while they hope you never read the tax code and find out that you aren’t subject to income tax. It’s all a scam to bleed you out financially until you are forced to be on government life support, so that they can completely control you and every aspect of your existence. They take all the real property, give you poisoned food, water and air and simply wait for you to die. But you have had the silver slippers all along, Dorothy! End the government, and you end ALL the problems, not just the loss of your homes, but your health, your freedom and your dissillusion. Never be forced to buy health insurance, never be forced to do ANYTHING by a government who has no right to order you around or take what you work for. Time for a new government, my angered fellow Americans. One that minds its own damn business and serves you, not the other way around.

  15. @J.G.,

    Don’t be depressed. The simple fact that all of this is known is enormous toward retoration of every single country. The reason I am so optimistic is that all those acts were committed only be a few people and it all is tied up. Get rid of the people and we can rebuild in no time.

    As an example: between 1999 and 2002, Gordon Brown (England Tresurer and Chacellor at some point. How did he manage to have both job at the same time has always remained a mystery) started to sell England’s gold. He got rid of 60% of their reserves. Why? People were up in arms. Didn’t make a dent: he had a plan and he followed it. We know how poorly England is doing. Where did that gold go? And why?

    England and the US have always been partners in crime. Fringe sites talk about “cabal” and ties between Israel, US and England. I don’t particularly read those sites but they have uncovered quite a bit of the puzzle I’ve been working on for years. But you know what? Nothing happens in a vacuum. Nothing. There were interests that were protected and pushed and those interests have been found out.

    We’re getting closer to pulling through.

    So please don’t get scared. We’re seen the worst (I hope.)

  16. “the fact is that the transaction never took place”

    Yes.That is true.as in my case at least.

    Donna Demello. 18 months at Club Fed.
    Over FIVE years of straw man loans.

    She took one for the team.
    She set James McConnville up, and let him fall.
    She is a team player.
    A bitch of the devil.

    she had us sign on LOT 256, then hid those, and forged (in conspiracy with another party, Donna Escamillo aka Staycee Bland)
    a set to the actual lot they gave us keys too. that was 107.

    FATCO thought I would not rememember DEMELLO telling me the lot number had changed that day.

    I DO! It took me two years to find the switch, but I did.
    I did not ever sign any deeds on LOT 107, only LOT 256!

    FATCO and DEMELLO and BLAND stole our identity in over FOUR home loans on FOUR different properties, and the FBI said this occurred, yet the court is telling me day after day, that my “motions are defective”

    Of course they are, as the defendants are tampering with the case files, taking out my POS, removing my declarations, re-writing my complaint, and substituting the files.

    oh and the Judges brother, a very close business asscociate of FATCO.

    The end of the case will not change the facts that I did not sign the recorded Deeds on the lot they set us up to live in, until the crash at least.

  17. @from Europe and staying there: 2 things: Yep. Poverty and injustice have always led to more crime, including the street version. Secondly,
    may I join you over there? I am so not kidding. I don’t have much wind left in my sail and I have actually been checking out ex-pat hang-outs.

  18. No, enraged, I didn’t know half of what you said. You’re a walking, talking encyclopedia. Sure you’re not an army?! Well, you’re a little army of one, anyway. I get a lot of my ‘news’ from you. I vaguely, very vaguely remember the disappearing gold business, I think. It’s overwhelming, really. May be sounds corny, but such a shame. We had a lot of promise. We got enough rope and hung ourselves.

  19. John Gault,

    And by the way, were you aware that Germany, France and Italy combined have more gold than the US? The thing is: IMF can verify any time the true amounts and they exist. Not true for the US gold.

    Can’t verify where that 8,130 tons is… How on earth do you lose that much gold? That’s another story and it’s not too pretty. A good portion of it was used… to pay debts to other countries. The American dollar is fiat money by excellence.

  20. John Gault,

    One precision I forgot: before IMF Strauss-Kahn arrived, in May 2011, and after his meeting with Putin, he specifically told the US that the purpose of his trip was to verify that the US, indeed, had as much gold as they pretended to have. It is easily verifiable by simple research. If you need me to, I’ll pull the newspapers articles.

    In any event, what happened afterwards is typical of CIA methods: find the weakness of your opponent (the guy is, indeed, a notorious womanizer) and set a trap. They put that Nafissatou Diallo in the picture, the woman folded like a cheap suit within a couple of weeks, the guy (who was planning to run for president and would have moved hell against the US) was incriminated, put out of commission and he didn’t run. Now, the French have Hollande anyway. Same thing. The US never expected that Hollande would run and they really thought they had eliminated the socialist party.

    Sloppy, sloppy, sloppy. The US have lost their edge… Can’t mingle into other countries’ affairs so easily anymore. Can’t put in power anybody they choose anymore… Going down, down, down.

  21. @John Gault,

    Water to your mill.

    BRICS is bailing out Europe (t’was to be expected) with a 60 billion influx to start. The US are going to find themselves all alone, with their fiat money, half the gold they declare to have (as you recall, an enormous quantity that was stored under the WTC vanished in the unfortunate evening of 9/11 never to be seen or heard of again, right after Silverstein had had to “pull the plug”.

    Interestingly enough, in May 2011, right before coming to the US, IMF Strauss-Kahn, who hjad been extrfemely vocal about the role American banks had played in the 2008 economic scandal, had a meeting with Putin during which he opensly questioned the actual gold reserves the US boasted about… and that he had repeatedly asked to see for several years, to no avail. Amazing how timing is everything.)

    Anyway, your quip about brushing up on your Chinese is not off the mark. And Europe and BRICS are pulling away from the US. Add to that Iran, Syria, the respective positions adopted by the different blocks and… it’s not going to be too comfortable being an American in the short future.

  22. Read?

  23. ToLLe, ToLLe, ToLLe…

    The drones are for target practice. I went through the trouble of elaborating how they were going completely revamp the economy by giving us work from Monday to Friday in the factories where they’re made and giving us entertainment in Saturday and Sunday when we go out and shoot them down.

    Don’t you read what we write?

  24. But….if we all stop paying our debts and everything comes to a standstill, how will we keep 30,000 drones flying high above the United States keeping us all safe from the Taliban?

  25. Hey JG,

    Take a look at what’s going on in Chicago. We don’t have to advocate violence. The injustice has gone on for so long that we are getting there.


  26. […] Visit site: Everyone Else Knows: Why Do We Continue To Ignore It? […]

  27. Is the whole thing actually “derivative(s)” because we have no real gnp? Is that the stinky-as-a-corpse truth? A false or at least less than legitimate market, eventually (fueled by unbridled greed) if not originally damned straight to hell, was created to give us (well, some people) something to buy/sell (besides war) to generate the ‘commerce’ we have failed at for one reason or a hundred? Yes, as Mr. G says and we all say, keep us in our homes at reasonable terms, whatEVER it takes. The most far-fetched and even unlawful mandate can’t be any worse than what has been done. Hell, call it National Security, the former if not current go-to for every stinking other thing under the sun. Condemn the mortgage – they’re all legally unconscionable, anyway. “Promissory estoppel” might be used in that regard or at least in litigation. Didn’t we sign a doc that said “MERS” was the benefiicary? Didn’t we sign a doc that said “MERS” could foreclose (subject to those two caveats they included)? Did we agree that any jerkie at all could claim against us under that doc? No, we didn’t (and the dot is an Adhesion Contract). Didn’t we detrimentally rely on the statements in the dot, that “MERS” would a-c-t? Would we have signed that doc if we had known the truth? We sure as sam hell would not have. A corporation may generally sub-out its work, but that’s not what MERS does. MERS never intended to do or act as alleged in that document. They knew someone else would and that MERS would never be involved or oversee those acts by others, such as a legitimate corporation which subs out some work does. That is unconscionable – or absolutely nothing is. In short, the dot is one big fat lie and that’s why or a big part of why they entered into that Consent Order, which imo is violated each and every time MERS sits on its a$$ (MERS doesn’t have arms or legs, tho it appears they do have a$$es) and allows these self-assignments to continue. Even after the consent order, they have done nothing to meet the obligations they alleged to us and induced us to rely on in that stinking, rat-b document. Oh, excuse me. They did enter into a contract with Genpact to do ‘something’. Sure would llike to know what that is. Cover their tail somehow? Don’t know why the Huffington Post hasnt gotten on that. Hey, MERS, how about you hire some e-m-p-l-o-y-e-e-s and to borrow a phrase from Peron via ALW, actually do some of the things you said in writing you would do? Too late. The dagger has run deep.
    I need valium. I’m surprised we’re not all medicated. Mister Hultman, yes, you, Bill, how dare you tell a court that “MERS complies with the instructions of the noteowners”? Show us, please, one missive to MERS from a noteowner instructing “MERS” to do one thing. Noteowner? How would you know who that is? You don’t even stand by the veracity of the (voluntary-only) entries in your own computer system, as demonstrated by your very own disclaimer.
    The gov’t can and should DO something. A gov’t that can create money and write those kinds of checks can do about anything. $crew lip service. We and the country are so past that. Give us our homes. Maybe we can return to being consumers and producers. What good is a handful of suits trading a bunch of dog-doobage, pretending it’s an economy? Nothing is any good if we don’t produce. Listening to some of the global realities posted here, do they think we have forever and a day? People who have paid their mortgages and resent help to those who haven’t / can’t need to get a clue. Get over it. If this ship goes down, they’re going with it.
    We need a true economy.
    On gp, no one currently in office should be re-elected for their sins, starting with participation or negligence in legislation – from denial-of-due-process and other highly prejudicial changes in foreclosure laws (a really vicious case of while we were sleeping) to securities and banking regulations. They’ll hear that, won’t they? Can’t we be, should we be, single-issue voters? “You were in, so you’re out”. The kid-gloves approach to Dimon and the likelihood of those acts and all the others receiving not even a modicum of legitimate scrutiny and warranted repurcussions is reflective of circumstances and a reality most of us (somewhat) understandably don’t want to acknowledge. Some here who call for stronger measures may have it right. What can we do to convince them the current m.o. is not working and is not going to? When we speak Chinese as a first language? (no offense to the chinese, of course)

  28. l recognize that–im a tired old man—not sure i can handle a “bootcamp” of any type—but id probably apprciate it.

  29. YES 100 % !!!!!!!!

  30. As long as we can still laughh about it, we’re in good shape. I missed Jon Stewart Friday. Ooff! Now, it’s fixed.


    Jon Stewart: It’s Almost as if GOP Senators Are on JPMorgan’s Payroll

    POSTED: June 15, 9:20 AM ET | By Jillian Rayfield

    Comment7Jon Stewart watched JPMorgan CEO Jamie Dimon testify before the Senate Banking Committee this week, and came to the conclusion that, in fact, “the person hardest on Jamie Dimon … was Jamie Dimon.” Like, for example, when Sen. Jim DeMint (R-SC) told Dimon that it’s no big deal that his firm lost $2 billion after making risky derivative trades, because “we lose twice that every day in Washington.”

    “Does Sen. DeMint think that spending money is the same as losing money?” Stewart wondered. “‘You know, I had $10 million here yesterday, but now all I see is this fucking highway.'” He added: “They’re sucking up to Jamie Dimon like they’re on JPMorgan’s payroll.” And in fact, the biggest campaign donor to many of the members on the Senate Banking Committee is … JPMorgan. Watch:

  31. “It is obviously obvious to anyone with a brain that companies are not going to borrow unless they think they need the money.” It goes farther than that: companies will do whatever it takes NOT to borrow if they can prevent it. Nor will individuals. Credit has run its course. Except for a few late or slow learners, people hesitate more and more tying themselves to a credit institution and contracting debts. They all know someone who defaulted because of hardship to be dragged into court by some JDB.

    You don’t even need a whole brain to get that! I, for one, who no longer have the one I was born with, can understand that much. That should tell you something.


    Did you check Max Gardner’s site? Did you see that you can actually sign up for bootcamp online?

  32. $16 trillion principal—about equal to national debt and less than 2.5% of the $600 trillion in derivatives contingency ? If the banks lose huge sums —which would be better, print money an buy mortgages from banks and pension trusts to give them liquidity—-or give them capital injections of like amount—–to pay their debts –last to co-gamblers. In the past the banks have treated termination of debt as a cardinal sin. They do not want to unwind high interest assets. Primary residence and some other eligibility tests–more likely to reduce economic and political stress. if they are going to inflate the pension assets away, then give em their homes at least.

Leave a Reply

%d bloggers like this: