Will Obama tell us to keep shopping? (Dylan Ratigan)

Huffington Post
May 4, 2011
By Dylan Ratigan

It's hard, even today, to really remember the carnage of 9/11, the sense of piercing fear in what had been a placid lake of prosperity. At that moment, anything great and anything terrible was possible. People remember him with a bullhorn on top of rubble, but President George W. Bush also prevented innumerable hate crimes by simply saying that Islam is a religion of peace. That sentiment represented the best of America. But then, he gave yet another clarion call, which was more important than his call for tolerance -- go shopping.

That was his moment, and that was his prescription for America. Go shopping. Now Obama has his moment, a moment richly earned by his security strategy. What will he use it for? It isn't clear. The forces of the status quo are powerful. This past weekend, Seth Meyers presided over a popularity contest between a birther-hugging cynic, Donald Trump, and the President, Barack Obama. It was DC's version of a Royal Wedding.

But then, on Sunday night, President Obama announced that Navy SEALS had delivered two bullets to Osama Bin Laden. Flag-waving throngs gathered outside the White House and in New York City to celebrate, clambering up trees and expressing joyful patriotism and exuberance. Others were more somber, remembering that death, even for one's enemies, is not to be welcomed lightly.

But I listened to our president, the one who only the day before had been throwing around amiable jokes about the political establishment. He said something that stuck with me, and should stick with all of us.

And tonight, let us think back to the sense of unity that prevailed on 9/11. I know that it has, at times, frayed. Yet today's achievement is a testament to the greatness of our country and the determination of the American people.

The cause of securing our country is not complete. But tonight, we are once again reminded that America can do whatever we set our mind to.

If this is true, and I believe it is, then we have much to do. If we can do whatever we set our minds to, then we should not be held back in our attempt to ending the banking oligarchy strangling our economy. If it is true that our struggle is one for "equality for all our citizens," as the president said, then we should end our poisonous petro-political path. As Glenn Hurowitz said, "now that we've killed Osama, let's kill oil." If it is the case that we up for our values abroad, then let's leave Afghanistan and end our highly destructive war on drugs.

This is now a moment. George W. Bush used his moment on behalf of the forces of the status quo. He told us, to go shopping.

Is the era of shopping over?

Selfish defined: Senate also rejects a bill by Chuck Schumer that would have extended all the cuts, but not for anybody making more than $1 mil

Not one individual in congress cares about what

they are doing to our grandchildren!

Could he please explain to me why it is OK to take $300 billion

of tax cuts for those at the highest income levels, above a million,

 and not pay for it," Schumer said, "and yet we have to pay for

unemployment insurance extensions?"

Arthur Delaney
Huffington Post
12/4/10

Senate Republicans and a handful of Democrats Saturday defeated a bill to reauthorize unemployment benefits for the long-term jobless and a plethora of tax provisions for the middle class not because of the bill's trillion-dollar deficit impact, but because it did not include tax cuts for the rich.

"In economic times like these, 9.8 percent unemployment, you should not raise taxes on anyone," Sen. John Barrasso (R-Wyo.) told HuffPost.

Two bills were defeated. By a vote of 53-36, the Senate rejected a measure by Sen. Max Baucus (D-Mont.) that would have preserved Bush era tax cuts for lower- and middle-income taxpayers, but would have allowed cuts for people earning more than $200,000 a year to expire. Democrats Joe Manchin (W.Va.), Ben Nelson (Neb.), Jim Webb (Va.), Russ Feingold (Wisc.) and Independent Democrat Joe Lieberman (Conn.) joined Republicans in voting nay. The Senate also rejected a bill by Sen. Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.) that would have extended all the cuts, but not for anybody making more than $1 million. Selfish & stick it to the grandkids continued

Nova Scotia Couple Gives Away $11.2 million Lottery Win, A MUST WATCH for Bernanke, Wall Street, Congress, Bank of America, Geithner, SEC, HFT, CNBC and .....

"Made Us Feel Good That We Could do

Something to Help Other People"

(Yes Ben, this is the generation of truly good folk
that you just financially euthanized)

AOL News
11/4/10

Allen and Violet Large, both in their 70s, won $11.2 million in the July 14 Lotto 649 draw, but instead of spending their new found fortune on lavish gifts they decided to hand it over to friends, charities and hospitals. "What you've never had, you never miss," Violet, 78, told the Canadian Press.

In fact the responsibility of their suddenly acquired vast fortune was a "big headache" for the couple, who had comfortably retired to Nova Scotia from Ontario after Allen left his job as a welder and Violet her stints at confectionery and cosmetic firms.

"We were pretty well set, not millionaires, but comfortable," said Allen.

After friends and family were taken care of, a large amount of the winnings were donated to hospitals where Violet had been undergoing cancer treatment. Funds were also handed out to the couple's local fire department, churches and cemeteries, the Red Cross, the Salvation Army.

"It made us feel good," said Violet. "And there's so much good being done with that money."

"That money that we won was nothing," Allen added. "We have each other."


Special Thanks to Huffington Post for the Head's Up

Big Banks and Hedge Funds...The New Tax Man, courtesy of TARP...and not even a thank you note from the banks.

At first, property owners may owe

little more than a few hundred dollars,

only to find their bills soaring

into the thousands.

Five big banks involved in the industry,

known as tax lien investing, collected a total

of more than $106 billion in bailout money

through the government's Troubled Asset Relief Program, known as TARP.

By Fred Schulte and Ben Protess
Huffington Post Investigative Fund
10/18/10

Nearly a dozen major banks and hedge funds, anticipating quick profits from homeowners who fall behind on property taxes, are quietly plowing hundreds of millions of dollars into businesses that collect the debts, tack on escalating fees and threaten to foreclose on the homes of those who fail to pay.

The Wall Street investors, which include Bank of America and JPMorgan Chase & Co., have purchased from local governments the right to collect delinquent taxes on several hundred thousand properties, many in distressed housing markets, the Huffington Post Investigative Fund has found.

In many cases, the banks and hedge funds created new companies to do their bidding. They gave the companies obscure, even whimsical names and used post office boxes as their addresses, masking Wall Street's dominant new role as a surrogate tax collector.

In exchange for paying overdue real estate taxes, the investors gain legal powers from local governments to collect the debt and levy fees. At first, property owners may owe little more than a few hundred dollars, only to find their bills soaring into the thousands. In some jurisdictions, the new Wall Street tax collectors also chase debtors over other small bills, such as for water, sewer and sidewalk repair.

Some states allow the investors to tack on as much as 18 percent interest and a passel of legal fees and other charges. When property owners fail to make full payment, the investors can sue to foreclose - in some states within as little as six months.

In June, Bank of America snatched up liens on properties in Florida owned by low-income residents and nonprofit public interest groups, including a Salvation Army shelter, a preschool and a wildlife rescue group involved in the Gulf of Mexico oil spill cleanup, the Investigative Fund found in its examination. Bank of America also bought liens on properties of the wealthy, including a professional basketball star with the Los Angeles Lakers, Lamar Odom. Link to complete Article

Video: Christine O'Donnell "I'm not a witch" Ad

Huffington Post
10/4/10
In her first television ad for Delaware's general election Senate race, Republican candidate Christine O'Donnell takes on a matter that has ignited controversy around her campaign: an old video clip in which she says she's "dabbled into witchcraft."

The suggestion from O'Donnell came during a 1999 appearance she made on "Politically Incorrect," HBO host Bill Maher's former ABC program.

"I'm not a witch," says the conservative hopeful at the beginning of the newly-released 30-second spot. "I'm nothing you've heard. I'm you."

Speaking very slowly and looking straight into the camera, O'Donnell continues, "None of us are perfect, but none of us can be happy with what we see all around us. Politicians who think spending, trading favors and backroom deals are the ways to stay in office. I'll go to Washington and do what you'd do. I'm Christine O'Donnell and I approve this message. I'm you."  Link to complete article

JPMorgan Chase suspends "certain" foreclosures...they too neglected to verify foreclosure documents

Huffington Post
9/30/10

Even as August saw more Americans lose their homes to foreclosure than in any other month on record, there are growing concerns over the legality of many of those proceedings.

JPMorgan Chase has suspended legal proceedings on "certain" foreclosures, due to concerns about the validity of the foreclosure documents, a spokesman for the bank told CNBC Wednesday (hat tip to Zero Hedge).

JPMorgan spokesman Tom Kelly confirmed to the AP Wednesday that "employees signed some affidavits about loan documents without personally verifying the files."

The decision is the latest signal of a potentially massive stall in the nation's foreclosure process. Last week, after GMAC Mortgage halted its foreclosures in 23 states, the Washington Post reported that one of GMAC's employees hadn't read the roughly 10,000 foreclosure documents he approved each month (and now Colorado wants to be added to that list of states). It then turned out that the "robo signer" might not have been alone.

This week, the controversy extended to JPMorgan Chase, as lawyers for a Florida homeowner challenged the person's JPMorgan foreclosure, citing a May statement from an executive for the bank who said she didn't properly review foreclosure documents before approving them.

Zero Hedge, for what it's worth, sees this as the beginning of a larger unraveling in the country's foreclosure process. Indeed, regardless of what JPMorgan determines during its review, the freeze will throw countless foreclosures into doubt.

As Bloomberg noted this week, delays in foreclosure proceedings would cripple the already wounded housing market.

Dylan Ratigan: Confessions of a Lobbyist, "Everybody's writing a check."

Huffington Post Recap
Corporations and interest groups have an unlimited ability to spend money on political causes, fostering an unethical and potentially illegal system of influence, a powerful Washington DC lobbyist acknowledged to MSNBC's Dylan Ratigan on Wednesday.

Appearing on the first installment of a series called "Follow the Money," the lobbyist, Jimmy Williams, a principal at Sonnenschein Nath and Rosenthal LLP, said corporations and interest groups often do not report to the IRS the large amounts of money they give to lawmakers and political action committees, choosing instead to pay a nominal fine. The money goes into a "black hole," Williams said, perpetuating a system he called "corrupt." In 2009, the congressional publication The Hill named Williams one of capital's top corporate lobbyists.

Williams cited the Supreme Court ruling at the beginning of this year in the case Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission Link to PDF, in which corporations received protection for their First Amendment right to spend money on political causes. Essentially, Williams said, the decision gives corporations the same rights he, a registered lobbyist, has -- except the corporations don't have to register as lobbyists. "If the court is saying that a corporation is a person, then why shouldn't they have to play by the same exact rules that I have to play by?" he said.

The solution, Williams said, is to end the practice of lavish fundraisers, in which these corporations and interest groups write large checks to finance political campaigns, and to switch to a system of federally-financed elections. If each taxpayer paid just four dollars more, he said, every lawmaker and the president would have $1 million per election cycle to spend on publicity.

Williams said both major political parties are in the game and special interests are happy to play in the current system. "Everybody's writing a check."

Ted Kaufman: "The Sytem is so awful"...and he is one of the few good guys!!

Ted Kaufman

"It is a perfect catch-22,"

"...I don't know what to say about the system.

The system is so awful."

Ryan Grim
Huffington Post
9/29/10

Appointed as a two-year caretaker to keep Joe Biden's seat warm for his son Beau Biden, Delaware's Ted Kaufman turned out to be one of the biggest surprises of the 111th Senate. His rousing speeches on the floor of the upper chamber rattled Wall Street and rallied opposition to banks that are protected as too big to fail.

His signature amendment to break up the banks, introduced with Ohio Democrat Sherrod Brown, was opposed by the White House and ultimately defeated, but the debate raised the profile of the issue and helped lead to reforms that forced banks to spin off some of their proprietary trading desks.

The effort, which Kaufman said would have succeeded with White House support, built him a strong following and led to pleas that he run for reelection; were he pitted today against Tea Party backed Christine O'Donnell, he'd no doubt be polling far ahead of her. (Beau decided not to run.)

But, Kaufman said in an interview with the Huffington Post, there's a paradox at work: If he'd been running for reelection, he wouldn't have those rabid backers, because he never would have waged his campaign against the banks - not because he would have worried it would hurt him politically, but simply because he would have had to spend more than half his time raising money and organizing his campaign.

"It is a perfect catch-22," said Kaufman, explaining that his campaign against the banks "wouldn't have existed, no, because I'm not on the banking committee. I would have stuck to my bidding on judiciary and foreign relations."

And without the campaign against the banks, he wouldn't have the supporters he now does. "I wouldn't have this rabid" following, he said. "That's the whole thing. It was a Catch-22. There's no way I could have -- my race, if I ran, would be totally, you know, standard, cookie-cutter campaign. I wouldn't have had anything to show. I never would have been able to do any of the things that would really be the major things in my campaign, because the whole stuff I'd done on financial reform--we never would have been part of the debate."

Kaufman said he would have watched the debate from afar. "I would have said, 'Jeez, you know, I'm really upset about this and that,' but I wouldn't have had the time. I would not have not done it because I didn't think it was politically" the smart move, he said.

Were he running in 2010, he added, he'd be facing a massively well-funded opponent, thanks to his opposition to Wall Street. "If I was a senator from a big state, New York, California, Illinois, the money--you couldn't win against the intensity of something like that. I would have been totally overwhelmed by the money. I guarantee," he said. "If I was in Illinois, whoever my opponent was would be the best-funded person."

Kaufman said that the only way out of the paradox he experienced is to create a system of public financing for campaigns, but the Supreme Court is making that increasingly less attainable. "If I'm czar, not president of the United States of America, I'd institute public financing of campaigns. But that cat's long out," he said. "So I don't know what the answer is. I don't know what to say about the system. The system is so awful."

Larry Summers: economy will eventually improve and "people aren't going to live with their parents forever"

Larry Summers: economy will eventually improve and

 "people aren't going to live with their parents forever"

....as Larry heads back to Harvard...living on campus??

Arthur Delaney
Huffington Post
9/28/10

One of President Obama's top economic advisers said Tuesday that the economy will eventually improve and that "people aren't going to live with their parents forever."

Speaking at the National Journal's Workforce of the Future conference, Larry Summers touted Democratic legislation to spur the economy and Obama's proposal to reauthorize expiring tax cuts for the middle class. He also said he took comfort in the "inherent cyclicality to economies.

"On average, the economy forms about 1.5 million family units each year," Summers said. "Housing starts are running at four or five hundred thousand. That's a natural economic response to the kind of inventory that exists. That's a reflection of the fact that family formation slows in more difficult times. But people aren't going to live with their parents forever. Family formation will come back to normal and indeed will catch up to reflect the delays that have taken place."

The Census Bureau reported this month that the number of families doubling up rose 11.6 percent from 2008 to 2010. An April study sponsored by the Mortgage Bankers Association found that "normal rates of household formation will not return until unemployment levels return to close to normal rates."

So how long will people live with their parents? Most forecasts have unemployment stubbornly high for the foreseeable future. Obama adviser Austan Goolsbee, for instance, said this month that unemployment is "going to stay high."

"It is true the economy is not fulfilling the promise many of us saw in the spring," Summers said. "I think that is a reflection of three factors. It's a reflection of the shocked confidence that came out of what was happening in Europe that raised risk premia, depressed markets, created uncertainty, and that proved to be much more virulent than most people expected. It's a reflection of the end of the inventory cycle, which had been a substantial source of tailwind leading to increased employment, increased hiring as inventories were replenished... And it's a reflection of the difficulty that firms have had in getting over the threshold and making a decision to expand their hiring, which led to lower levels of income which in turn led to lower levels of hiring."

Speaking about the looming game of chicken over the expiring Bush era tax cuts in Congress, Summers said, "Look at what middle class families have been through and it's hard to believe this is the right time to be raising gridlock concerns about whether we're going to substantially increase middle class families' taxes in the midst of a recession."

Warren Buffet: "we're not going to have a double-dip recession at all." WAIT: "It's common sense that we are still in a recession."

Before your CNBC Town Hall Meeting, my line will be:

"we're not going to have a double-dip recession at all."

Nice recap by Huffington Post

The Oracle of Omaha told CNBC this morning that it's just plan "common sense" -- "we're still in a recession."

If you've been following Warren Buffett's statements on the economy lately you may be a bit confused. Earlier this month, in an appearance with Microsoft CEO Steve Balmer, Buffett said "we're not going to have a double-dip recession at all." (Presumably this is because, according to Buffett, the first recession never really ended.)

Earlier this week, the National Bureau of Economic Research, the independent body that tracks downturns in the U.S., recently announced that the recession ended in June 2009. But in an interview with CNBC's Becky Quick, Buffett disputed that notion:

BECKY: The NBER said this week that the-- recession officially ended back in June of last year.

BUFFETT: Well, they define it differently. (Laughs.) But I-- I mean, I-- I define it-- I think we're in a recession until real per capita GDP gets back to where it was-- before. That is not the way the National Bureau of Economic Research measures it. But I will tell you that to any-- on any common sense definition, the average American is below where he was before, or his family, in terms of real income, GDP. We're still in a recession. And-- and we're not gonna be out of it for awhile, but we will get out of it.

Buffett added that most small businesses "have come back somewhat" but haven't approached anything near their pre-crisis levels. Banks, Buffett said, are sitting on "trillions" and "dying to get the money out." A host of bad loans and a still sagging consumer, he suggested, have prlonged the downturn. Here's more:

BUFFETT: Our businesses are coming back-- on average, we've got 70-some businesses. But most of them-- the great majority are coming back slowly. If you take our railroad business, and our railroad business is typical of the other railroads in the company. If you take the peak period for shipments and then you go all the way down to the bottom, we're 61 percent of the way back up. That's better, I think, than most businesses are in the country. I don't think most businesses are 61 percent-- our-- our carpet business, our brick business, our insulation business, they're not back 61 percent, but they are moving back.
 

Jon Stewart Rally to Restore Sanity versus Stephen Colbert March To Keep Fear Alive

Rally to Restore Sanity

versus

March To Keep Fear Alive

Thanks to Huffington Post for the head's up.

Jon Stewart and Steven Colbert will march together on Washington. Or against each other in Washington.

Either way, expect plenty of Comedy Central fans to show up on October 30 when Stewart's "Rally To Restore Sanity" will meet Colbert's "March To Keep Fear Alive" in the nation's capital.

The duo have been hinting at a major announcement for several episodes in a mock response to Glenn Beck's own "Restoring Honor" rally that was held this year on the anniversary of a famous Martin Luther King speech at the same monument. There's no indication that the announced get-together is a joke, though. Both comedians are telling their audiences to book hotel rooms now (though for different reasons, as you'll see).

"It'll be like being in a chat room," Stewart explained. "But real."

Stewart punctuated his announcement on the earlier program with a homemade-looking banner reading, "Take It Down A Notch For America."

Colbert followed up with an announcement on his own show, and insisted that he would "notch it up a scotch."

Each man ventured into the other's studios for moments you'll just have to see for yourself ...

The Daily Show With Jon Stewart	Mon - Thurs 11p / 10c
Rally to Restore Sanity
www.thedailyshow.com
Daily Show Full Episodes Political Humor Tea Party

The Colbert Report	Mon - Thurs 11:30pm / 10:30c
March to Keep Fear Alive
www.colbertnation.com
Colbert Report Full Episodes 2010 Election Fox News

Tim Pawlenty says no to Obamacare...well, maybe just $263 million, then I really mean it!

Pawlenty Allows Millions in Federal Health Care Funds

to Flow Into Minnesota Despite His Anti-ObamaCare Order

Amanda Terkel
Huffington Post
9/14/10

Despite Minnesota Gov. Tim Pawlenty's (R) recent executive order intended to stop the implementation of federal health care reform in Minnesota, millions of dollars from the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act will still be flowing into the state, with the governor's blessing. The Huffington Post has learned that the state Department of Health is considering 10 federal grants worth more than $10 million in total and the governor's office is allowing all but two of those grants to go forward, highlighting the fact that Pawlenty is more than willing to take advantage of federal money when it fits his agenda.

Pawlenty has been a vocal critic of federal health care reform, and as spokesman Bruce Gordon explained to the Huffington Post, the governor is "striving to find ways to stop its implementation in Minnesota." But the executive order left the door open to allowing some money from federal health reform to flow into Minnesota, as long as it is required by law or authorized by Pawlenty:

All executive branch departments and agencies are directed that no application shall be submitted to the federal government in connection with requests for grant funding for programs and demonstration projects deriving from the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act ("PPACA" or "the Act") (Pub.L. 111-148) unless otherwise required by law, or approved by the office of the Governor.

As HuffPost previously reported, Pawlenty is largely picking and choosing federal money based on his ideological preferences. While he is refusing to let the Department of Health apply for comprehensive sex education funds, he is allowing the agency to go forward on an abstinence-only education grant, even though it requires the state to spend its own money on a matching grant.

Minnesota state Rep. Erin Murphy (D) pointed to political motivations for Pawlenty's order, saying that in the past, he embraced some of the concepts -- like insurance exchanges -- that he is now rejecting. She said that although some Affordable Care Act money may still come in, the order will nevertheless affect the state. "We're exploring the opportunity of an exchange in Minnesota," she said. "The grants that we passed by would have provided for working groups -- the actuarial analysis how an exchange impacts our insurance market, and we have a lot of expertise around the table, but we don't have that expertise."

Dr. Lynn Blewett, a University of Minnesota health policy expert who is part of the health insurance exchange working group referenced by Murphy, said that, ironically, Pawlenty's order may have the effect of bringing more federal authority into Minnesota. Blocking the grant will not prevent the state from moving forward with exchanges, but rather, according to Blewett, force the working group to make decisions with the existing data it has. In the case that it won't be able to agree on a state exchange, Minnesota would default to a federal exchange. "It's interesting because it's exactly what he doesn't want to happen," said Blewett. "But by saying no, we're not going to do this, most of the stuff defaults to the federal government."

Pawlenty has been a sharp critic of the federal government's "reckless spending," but in addition to these selected funds from the Affordable Care Act, the governor has accepted $263 million in Medicaid funds, even though they were part of a federal spending package he previously bashed. The Huffington Post contacted Pawlenty's office but did not receive a response.

Geithner Calendar...hey Tim, Mr. Blankfein is here to see you....again (Huffington Post)

Great Job Shahien!

...Mr. Geithner, thanks for waiting...Mr. Blankfein will see you now...

Shahien Nasiripour
Huffington Post
9/14/10

When it comes to spending time with Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner, the head of Goldman Sachs may have an easier time getting a meeting than either the Speaker of the House or the Senate Majority Leader.

Goldman CEO Lloyd Blankfein has shown up on Geithner's calendar at least 38 times through March since the Treasury Secretary took office in January 2009, three more entries than Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid and 13 more than House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, according to a copy of Geithner's daily log recently published online by the Treasury Department.

All told, Geithner met with, spoke to, or attempted to secure conversations with Wall Street chieftains at least 49 times during the five-month period ending in March 2010, a slight increase from the 37 entries on his calendar during the previous five-month period.

But it's still far below his first five months in office, when Geithner met with chief executives from firms like Citigroup, JPMorgan Chase, Morgan Stanley and BlackRock at least 76 times -- more calendar entries than for the heads of the regional Federal Reserve banks, who are the top overseers of systemically-important banks like JPMorgan, Citi, Bank of America and Wells Fargo -- or for top members of Congress like Reid, Pelosi, their Republican counterparts, and the heads of the Senate and House committees overseeing financial institutions and economic policy.

A Huffington Post review of Geithner's calendar shows how personally involved he was in Congressional efforts to re-regulate the financial system; how Christina Romer, the former chair of the White House Council of Economic Advisers, slowly faded from the Treasury Secretary's daily log; how Republicans may have a case when they gripe about not being consulted on economic policy; the continuing involvement of former Treasury Secretary and Citigroup chairman Robert Rubin; the revolving door of access shown to former Fed chairman Paul Volcker; and how President Barack Obama's top economic adviser, Larry Summers, was in close contact during the early months of Geithner's tenure but then faded behind White House Chief of Staff Rahm Emanuel as the administration geared up for the pending political battle over financial reform.

The calendar entries show calls made and received -- both completed calls and attempts -- as well as face-to-face meetings in the Treasury Department and elsewhere. However, it doesn't show calls Geithner may have made from home or on his way home, or meetings he may have had on the fly while in the White House or on Capitol Hill. It's not totally complete, but it's as close to complete as available. Complete article

Inside Job Trailer (thank you Huffington Post and Nouriel Roubini)

The trailer for Charles Ferguson's new documentary "Inside Job" has been making its way around the web (hat tip to Nouriel Roubini's Twitter feed). The film has been getting serious love from critics, including winning the top award at Cannes this year.

Roger Ebert called the the film "devastating" summed it up this way in May:

"From Roosevelt until Reagan, the American economy enjoyed 40 years of stability, prosperity and growth. Beginning with Reagan's moves against financial regulation, that sound base has been progressively eroded. The crucial federal error (in administrations of both parties) was to allow financial institutions to trade on their own behalf. Today many large trading banks are betting against their own customers."

"Inside Job" is due out in October. WATCH the trailer:

Banks Playing "Foreclosure Roulette" with Delinquent Homeowners...Extend and Pretend

Arthur Delaney
HuffingtonPost
9/1/10

Bea Garwood has been bracing for foreclosure since May, but she says she's been told three times to expect a sheriff's sale in the next month and it still hasn't happened.

"We really at this point do not know where we are in the process," said Garwood, who lives in Pinckney, Mich. with her husband. "We have no clue. We haven't even heard from Chase bank in three weeks."

The Garwoods may have had a lucky spin in the game that industry analyst Sean O'Toole calls "Foreclosure Roulette."

Banks don't want to recognize losses by having to put homes on the market at foreclosure-sale prices, but they don't want to encourage borrowers to quit making payments either, so, O'Toole believes, they randomly foreclose on some people to prevent widespread "moral hazard." The rest are left hanging with the help of the government's "extend and pretend" approach to the collapse of the housing bubble.

"We just don't have the political appetite to bail homeowners out," said O'Toole, CEO of ForeclosureRadar.com. "On the other hand, we don't have the political appetite to kick them out."

The Gestation Period of HAMP

Last year the Garwoods tried to modify the mortgage on their Pinckney, Mich. home under the Obama administration's Home Affordable Modification Program, which is supposed to put eligible borrowers into a three-month trial period before making the modification "permanent" for five years. The Garwoods' trial period dragged on for nine months before they received a letter of rejection in March. They've been waiting anxiously since then for the day they will finally lose their house.

Extend and Pretend...courtesy of HAMP

It may be a while. The average foreclosure now takes 469 days, according to Lender Processing Services, whereas it took 319 days at the beginning of 2009. Many industry analysts say that is due to the Troubled Asset Relief Program, HAMP, and federal accounting-rule changes.

We weakened accounting standards to allow banks to keep non-paying mortgages in their books at full value," wrote economist Dean Baker, co-director of the progressive Center for Economic and Policy Research. "Banks also know that they are looking at glutted markets right now, so they have little incentive to take possession of a home and then try to sell it. And, the HAMP and other programs mostly delay foreclosures and hand money to banks, instead of keeping people in their homes."

American Banker reported last week that the procrastination on foreclosures could backfire: "With home prices expected to fall as much as 10% further, the refusal to foreclose quickly on and sell distressed homes at inventory-clearing prices may be contributing to the stall of the overall market seen in July sales data. It also may increase the likelihood of more strategic defaults."

Of the 1.5 million trial offers made by servicers participating in HAMP, 616,839 have resulted in cancellations, while only 434,716 have resulted in permanent modifications, according to government data released in August. But Treasury officials have said even if a person isn't able to stay in his or her home, HAMP is a success if assists that person in "transitioning with dignity to more suitable housing."

Borrowers rejected from HAMP are sometimes confused, as the Garwoods are, about the reason for their rejection. (Chase has declined to comment on the Garwoods' situation.)

"There's still a lot of uncertainty about why certain homeowners are receiving help in HAMP and others are not," said Diane Standaert, legislative counsel with the Center for Responsible Lending. Standaert said policymakers should consider allowing bankruptcy judges to write down mortgage principal (a process sometimes known as "cramdown"). "I think this new game of casino that lenders and servicers are playing with homeowners...is not going to cut it."

Family Handcuffed on their way to camping. Welcome to Mission Hills.

Thanks to Huffington Post for the head's up. The Great Outdoors!!

MISSION HILLS -- A case of mistaken identity led to a family of five, headed on a camping trip, being frisked on the 405 Freeway and placed in handcuffs.

Los Angeles Police Department officials came across the family's white van around 5:45 a.m. Friday, which came back as a stolen vehicle.

Officers followed the van and eventually pulled it over in the northbound lanes just past Rinaldi St., near the 5 Freeway.

One-by-one, family members got out of the car with their hands in the air and were instructed to lie face down in the middle of the freeway.

They were placed in handcuffs and taken into custody for questioning.

It turns out, the van's license plate had been replaced with a stolen vehicle license plate, police told KTLA. The family was not aware of the switch. The family members were released and continued on to their vacation destination.
KTLA News

Best Places to Live and the winner is....Eden Prairie, MN (CNNMoney.com)

Huffington Post:

For those of us looking to relocate, look no farther than Eden Prairie, Minnesota, which was named by Money Magazine as the best small city to live in America.

This year, Money's annual rankings examined 746 cities with populations between 8,500 to 50,000 and winnowed the list down by removing areas that had significant job losses, low salaries, overly expensive housing or poor school systems. (Check out the FAQ on their criteria here.)

Eden Prairie's ranking was bolstered by strong local employers -- including the NFL's Minnesota Vikings, who hold their training camp in town.

Rounding out the top five were Columbia/Ellicott City, Maryland; Newtown, Massachusetts; Bellevue, Washington; and McKinney, Texas.

In this economy, it's not surprising that all of the top five were bolstered by considerable job generators nearby. For example, Columbia/Ellicott neighbors the National Security Agency and other government job providers; Bellevue is boosted by Microsoft and T-Mobile; and Newtown benefits from Boston College and other Beantown job centers.

Mashable reports that those looking to visit Money's "Best Places to live" can now take a mini-tour of local haunts on Gowalla. For those interested in acquiring Gowalla badges for local establishments in McKinney, Texas, you already have options. Link to top 100 list

Average Homeowner In Assistance Program UNDERWATER (Huffington Post)

Shahien Nasiripour
Huffington Post
7/6/10

The average beneficiary of the Obama administration's flagship homeowner-assistance program owes their mortgage lender more than $1.50 for every dollar their home is worth, which means they fall into the stratum of homeowners most likely to simply walk away from their mortgages, recent government data show.

This little-noticed statistic was disclosed in a June 24 report by the Government Accountability Office. Citing government data collected through mid-April, the report found that even homeowners who receive lower monthly payments through the administration's Home Affordable Modification Program are still struggling "under water," meaning they owe more on their mortgages than their homes are worth.

A recent study by Federal Reserve economists shows that underwater homeowners are, not surprisingly, much more likely to default on their mortgages. Moreover, borrowers who are deeply underwater -- like those in HAMP, who average negative 50 percent home equity -- are far more likely to default willingly; that is, to give up on trying to overcome their growing mountains of debt, and just stop paying at all.

This revelation underscores the problems with the path taken by the Treasury Department to help homeowners, who merited federal attention only after the government gifted Wall Street banks with hundreds of billions of taxpayer dollars to survive a financial meltdown largely of their own making. Rather than designing a program exclusively focused on homeowners, the administration chose to set up an initiative that seeks to balance the needs of homeowners with the interests of lenders and investors.

Thus, while the average homeowner in the program is saving more than $500 a month, 28 percent more homeowners have been bounced from the program than have been helped. Homeowners that receive permanent reductions in their monthly mortgage payments end up deeper underwater than they were before they were "helped." Meanwhile, lenders and investors continue to foreclose on properties at a record pace.

On Tuesday two top Republicans released a Thursday letter to Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner calling for the administration to "immediately" end HAMP.

"It defies common sense that taxpayer money is being used to pay banks to modify loans that are likely to default anyway," said Rep. Darrell Issa (Calif.), the ranking Republican on the House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform. "In cases where loan changes could keep borrowers out of foreclosure, banks have a clear incentive to make changes without a need for public funds." 

They don't necessarily have an incentive to help homeowners, however. Consumer advocates like Diane E. Thompson, a lawyer with the National Consumer Law Center, said part of the reason the average HAMP homeowner is so deeply underwater is that underwater homeowners are more likely to get a loan modification approved than less-desperate borrowers with positive equity in their homes.

That's because of the test that mortgage servicers run to determine whether homeowners qualify for the program. Called the "net present value" test, it essentially tells lenders and investors whether they'll make more money foreclosing on the home or modifying the borrower's mortgage. This profit motive determines whether distressed borrowers will keep their homes or be kicked to the curb.

The test "favors homeowners who are underwater," Thompson said. "The less equity you have in the house, the more likely you'll pass the NPV test."

"One of the real failures of HAMP" is its inability to help the "little old lady who's lived in her house for 30 years," Thompson added.
 Link to yet another failed government program

Unbelievable levels of debt placed on the backs

of our grandchldren for WHAT REASON?