PLEASE ONLY POST - Articles, Official Letters, Testimony, Rules and Regs. Moe - perhaps a Sticky is

ama125

LoanSafe Member
Well, after typing a reply and attempting to post it, some strange window wanting to install spyware popped up trying to scan my PC...guess I won't be posting a response, too bad I wasted my time typing one up!
 

Papa4

LoanSafe Member
Although this doesn't solve our imediate problems it is an interesting possibility.

<TABLE id=ViewArticleTable cellSpacing=0 cellPadding=4 width="100%" border=0><TBODY><TR><TD align=left width=0></TD></TR><TR><TD vAlign=top align=left>Cut Wall Street Out! Own Your Own Bank
How States Can Finance Their Own Recovery

By Ellen Brown

</TD></TR><TR><TD noWrap align=left colSpan=2>Global Research, November 3, 2009
</TD></TR><TR><TD noWrap align=left colSpan=2>Web of Debt - 2009-11-01
</TD></TR><TR><TD align=left colSpan=2>
Pouring money into the private banking system has only fixed the economy for bankers and the wealthy; it has not done much to address either the fundamental problem of unemployment or the debt trap so many Americans find themselves in.

President Obama's $787 billion stimulus plan has so far failed to halt the growth of unemployment: 2.7 million jobs have been lost since the stimulus plan began. California has lost 336,400 jobs. Arizona has lost 77,300. Michigan has lost 137,300. A total of 49 states and the District of Columbia have all reported net job losses.

In this dark firmament, however, one bright star shines. The sole state to actually gain jobs is an unlikely candidate for the distinction: North Dakota. North Dakota is also one of only two states expected to meet their budgets in 2010. (The other is Montana.) North Dakota is a sparsely populated state of less than 700,000 people, largely located in cold and isolated farming communities. Yet, since 2000, the state's GNP has grown 56 percent, personal income has grown 43 percent and wages have grown 34 percent. The state not only has no funding problems, but this year it has a budget surplus of $1.3 billion, the largest it has ever had.

Why is North Dakota doing so well, when other states are suffering the ravages of a deepening credit crisis? Its secret may be that it has its own credit machine. North Dakota is the only state in the Union to own its own bank. The Bank of North Dakota (BND) was established by the state legislature in 1919, specifically to free farmers and small businessmen from the clutches of out-of-state bankers and railroad men. The bank's stated mission is to deliver sound financial services that promote agriculture, commerce and industry in North Dakota.

The Advantages of Owning Your Own Bank

So, how does owning a bank solve the state's funding problems? Isn't the state still limited to the money it has? The answer is no. Chartered banks are allowed to do something nobody else can do: They can create credit on their books simply with accounting entries, using the magic of "fractional reserve" lending. As the Federal Reserve Bank of Dallas explains on its web site:

"Banks actually create money when they lend it. Here's how it works: Most of a bank's loans are made to its own customers and are deposited in their checking accounts. Because the loan becomes a new deposit, just like a paycheck does, the bank ... holds a small percentage of that new amount in reserve and again lends the remainder to someone else, repeating the money-creation process many times."

How many times? President Obama puts this "multiplier effect" at eight to ten. In a speech on April 14, he said:

"[A]lthough there are a lot of Americans who understandably think that government money would be better spent going directly to families and businesses instead of banks - 'where's our bailout?,' they ask - the truth is that a dollar of capital in a bank can actually result in eight or ten dollars of loans to families and businesses, a multiplier effect that can ultimately lead to a faster pace of economic growth."

It can, but it hasn't recently, because private banks are limited by bank capital requirements and by their for-profit business models. And that is where a state-owned bank has enormous advantages: States own huge amounts of capital, and they can think farther ahead that their quarterly profit statements, allowing them to take long-term risks. Their asset bases are not marred by oversized salaries and bonuses; they have no shareholders expecting a sizable cut, and they have not marred their books with bad derivatives bets, unmarketable collateralized debt obligations and mark-to-market accounting problems.

The Bank of North Dakota (BND) is set up as a dba: "the State of North Dakota doing business as the Bank of North Dakota." Technically, that makes the capital of the state the capital of the bank. Projecting the possibilities of this arrangement to California, the State of California owns about $200 billion in real estate, has $62 billion in various investments and has $128 billion in projected 2009 revenues. Leveraged by a factor of eight, that capital base could support nearly $4 trillion in loans.

To get a bank charter, specific investments would probably need to be earmarked by the state as startup capital; but the startup capital required for a typical California bank is only about $20 million. This is small potatoes for the world's eighth largest economy, and the money would not actually be "spent." It would just become bank equity, transmuting from one form of investment into another - and a lucrative investment at that. In the case of the BND, the bank's return on equity is about 25 percent. It pays a hefty dividend to the state, which is expected to exceed $60 million this year. In the last decade, the BND has turned back a third of a billion dollars to the state's general fund, offsetting taxes. California could do substantially better than that. California pays $5 billion annually just in interest on its debt. If it had its own bank, the bank could refinance its debt and return that $5 billion to the state's coffers; and it would make substantially more on money lent out.

Besides capital, a bank needs "reserves," which it gets from deposits. For the BND, this too is no problem, since it has a captive deposit base. By law, the state and all its agencies must deposit their funds in the bank, which pays a competitive interest rate to the state treasurer. The bank also accepts deposits from other entities. These copious deposits can then be plowed back into the state in the form of loans.

Public Banking on the Central Bank Model

The BND's populist organizers originally conceived of the bank as a credit union-like institution that would free farmers from predatory lenders, but conservative interests later took control and suppressed these commercial lending functions. The BND is now chiefly a "bankers' bank." It acts like a central bank, with functions similar to those of a branch of the Federal Reserve. It avoids rivalry with private banks by partnering with them. Most lending is originated by a local bank. The BND then comes in to participate in the loan, share risk and buy down the interest rate.

One of the BND's functions is to provide a secondary market for real estate loans, which it buys from local banks. Its residential loan portfolio is now $500 billion to $600 billion. This function has helped the state to avoid the credit crisis that afflicted Wall Street when the secondary market for loans collapsed in late 2007. Before that, investors routinely bought securitized loans (CDOs) from the banks, making room on the banks' books for more loans. But these "shadow lenders" disappeared when they realized that the derivatives called "credit default swaps" supposedly protecting their CDOs were a highly unreliable form of insurance. In North Dakota, this secondary real estate market is provided by the BND, which has invested conservatively, avoiding the speculative derivatives debacle.

Other services the BND provides include guarantees for entrepreneurial startups and student loans, the purchase of municipal bonds from public institutions and a well-funded disaster loan program. When the city of Fargo was struck by a massive flood recently, the disaster fund helped the city avoid the devastation suffered by New Orleans in similar circumstances; and when North Dakota failed to meet its state budget a few years ago, the BND met the shortfall. The BND has an account with the Federal Reserve Bank, but its deposits are not insured by the FDIC. Rather, they are guaranteed by the State of North Dakota itself - a prudent move today, when the FDIC is verging on bankruptcy.

The Commercial Banking Model: The Commonwealth Bank of Australia

The BND studiously avoids competition with private banks, but a publicly-owned bank could profitably engage in commercial lending. A successful model for that approach was the Commonwealth Bank of Australia, which served both central bank and commercial bank functions. For nearly a century, the publicly-owned Commonwealth Bank provided financing for housing, small business, and other enterprise, affording effective public competition that "kept the banks honest" and kept interest rates low. Commonwealth Bank put the needs of borrowers ahead of profits, ensuring that sound investment flows were maintained to farming and other essential areas; yet, the bank was always profitable, from 1911 until nearly the end of the century.

Indeed, it seems to have been too profitable, making it a takeover target. It was simply "too good not to be privatized." The bank was sold in the 1990s for a good deal of money, but it's proponents consider it's loss as a social and economic institution to be incalculable.

A State Bank of Florida?

Could the sort of commercial model tested by Commonwealth Bank work today in the United States? Economist Farid Khavari thinks so. A Democratic candidate for governor of Florida, he proposes a Bank of the State of Florida (BSF) that would make loans to Floridians at much lower interest rates than they are getting now, using the magic of fractional reserve lending. He explains:

"For $100 in deposits, a bank can create $900 in new money by making loans. So, the BSF can pay 6 percent for CDs, and make mortgage loans at 2 percent. For $6 per year in interest paid out, the BSF can earn $18 by lending $900 at 2 percent for mortgages."

The state would earn $15,000 per $100,000 of mortgage, at a cost of about $1,700, while the homeowner would save $88,000 in interest and pay for the home 15 years sooner. "Our bank will save people about seven years of their pay over the course of 30 years, just on interest costs," says Dr. Khavari. He also proposes 6 percent credit cards and 6 percent certificates of deposit.

The state could earn billions yearly on these loans, while saving hefty sums for consumers. It could also refinance its own debts and those of its municipal governments at very low interest rates. According to a German study, interest composes 30 percent to 50 percent of everything we buy. Slashing interest costs can make projects such as low-cost housing, alternative energy development, and infrastructure construction not only sustainable, but profitable for the state, while at the same time creating much-needed jobs.

Written for Truthout.
Ellen Brown developed her research skills as an attorney practicing civil litigation in Los Angeles. In Web of Debt, her latest book, she turns those skills to an analysis of the Federal Reserve and “the money trust.†She shows how this private cartel has usurped the power to create money from the people themselves, and how we the people can get it back. Her earlier books focused on the pharmaceutical cartel that gets its power from “the money trust.†Her eleven books include Forbidden Medicine, Nature’s Pharmacy (co-authored with Dr. Lynne Walker), and The Key to Ultimate Health: Non-toxic Dentistry (co-authored with Dr. Richard Hansen). Her websites are www.webofdebt.com and www.ellenbrown.com.

</TD></TR><TR><TD align=left colSpan=2><HR></TD></TR><TR><TD align=left colSpan=2>Disclaimer: The views expressed in this article are the sole responsibility of the author and do not necessarily reflect those of the Centre for Research on Globalization. The contents of this article are of sole responsibility of the author(s). The Centre for Research on Globalization will not be responsible or liable for any inaccurate or incorrect statements contained in this article.

To become a Member of Global Research

The CRG grants permission to cross-post original Global Research articles on community internet sites as long as the text & title are not modified. The source and the author's copyright must be displayed. For publication of Global Research articles in print or other forms including commercial internet sites, contact: [email protected]

www.globalresearch.ca contains copyrighted material the use of which has not always been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. We are making such material available to our readers under the provisions of "fair use" in an effort to advance a better understanding of political, economic and social issues. The material on this site is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving it for research and educational purposes. If you wish to use copyrighted material for purposes other than "fair use" you must request permission from the copyright owner.

For media inquiries: [email protected]

© Copyright Ellen Brown, Web of Debt, 2009

The url address of this article is: www.globalresearch.ca/PrintArticle.php?articleId=15905
</TD></TR><TR><TD><HR>
© Copyright 2005-2007 GlobalResearch.ca
Web site engine by Polygraphx Multimedia © Copyright 2005-2007
</TD></TR></TBODY></TABLE>
 

THANKS2U

LoanSafe Member
Here we go RIGGED REVERSE RENTALS, as I like to say

The Abusive Corrupt Criminal Banking Institutions, including Fannie Mae, now become your LANDLORDS -

And you rent your own home with no modification help.

Rent cost ? who knows whatever they want.

You have No Rights & No Tax write offs, which means you wil now be paying higher income taxes.

WHAT A HUGE MONSTEROUS MESS !

This is the future for many - NO MODS FOR YOU - YOU ALL RENT NOW

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/11/06/business/economy/06fannie.html?partner=yahoofinance

GREEDY SELF SERVING SWINDLING BAASTARDS

This is like STALINS RUSSIA
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

And here is a recent article on Nov 9th Titled NO HAMP FOR YOU

No HAMP For You! NYC Homeowners Sue Over Mods : HousingWire || financial news for the mortgage market

This 5th Amendment defense, as stated in the article, looks to have some real Teeth to take a defensive Bite out of these VBD's Vicious Banking DOGS, which are attacking us all like an out of control pack of wild dogs.

HOW VERY DISGUSTING AND VERY IRRESPONSIBLE THAT OUR U.S.TREASURY DEPARTMENT RUFUSED TO COMMENT ON THIS CASE.

THE TREASURY SHOULD HAVE STATED THAT ANYTHING TO HELP THE AMERICAN PEOPLE RECEIVE THE HAMP MODIFICATIONS THEY DESERVE, THE TREASURY WELCOMES AND SUPPORTS.

The Treasury is sadly starting to show its true Bias & Corrupt Power Structure !

http://www.housingwire.com/2009/11/09/no-hamp-for-you-nyc-homeowners-sue-over-mods/

Thanks for the article davephx

Respectfully,

Thanks2u
 

davephx

LoanSafe Member
Treasury or the others are not going to comment on any pending case, that is just normal.

Treasury has no enforcement power. They at least were able to require the "shame" reports to show how bad the servicers are doing. New report in a few days for 10/30 reporting.

Treasury can do nothing much more since it was given by Congress no enforcement powers. In the Minnesota case they did a very indepth answer as they will in this case but in a legal answer not to the media.

At least the lawsuit gets more attention.
 

THANKS2U

LoanSafe Member
Treasury or the others are not going to comment on any pending case, that is just normal.

Treasury has no enforcement power. They at least were able to require the "shame" reports to show how bad the servicers are doing. New report in a few days for 10/30 reporting.

Treasury can do nothing much more since it was given by Congress no enforcement powers. In the Minnesota case they did a very indepth answer as they will in this case but in a legal answer not to the media.

At least the lawsuit gets more attention.
I agree davephx - "That is just normal."

However, I am of the opinion that circumstances today are FAR FAR from normal and that the treasury should have commented on the case in some fashion, as to approximate what I mentioned in my prior post that the Treasury's opinion on all matters of HAMP modifications should be that, anyone who deserves a HAMP modification should be receiving a HAMP modification, PERIOD !

Or at the very least the Treasury should say... Anyone who deserves a HAMP mod will be put into a NETM - NEVER ENDING TRIAL MODIFICATION - where borrowers are trapped in a tangling net, like fish at sea and if and when the Banking Servicer Boat EVER decides to bring any borrower on board with a PERMANENT MODIFICATION, will be a cold day in hell....

Of course I jest, but the truth is, I'm really not too far off from the reality of this "Active Trial Modification BS, am I...

WHERE THE HELL ARE ALL THE SUSTAINABLE PERMANENT MODIFICATIONS ! FEW AND FAR BETWEEN THAT'S WHERE & I AM EXTREMELY CONCERNED THAT TRULY SUSTAINABLE MODIFICATIONS OF ANT TYPE WILL CONTINUE TO BE FEW AND FAR BETWEEN RIGHT ON THROUGH 2012

I hope I am wrong though...?

Thank you for all your informative posts davephx

Appreciatively,

Thanks2U
 

THANKS2U

LoanSafe Member
Thanks Housebroken13 FOR THE LINK BELOW ---

Many of the "Active Trial Modifications" are only allowing the Banks to STEAL as much money as they possibly can before they foreclose, which really is their plan for the most part.

You see, if the servicer says NO MODIFICATION FOR YOU UP FRONT,
then many people will stay in thier homes for as long as possible without paying any payments and BECAUSE THE BANKS ARE BACK LOGGED AND OVERLOADED WITH PAPERWORK, Active foreclosures will take a longer time period than usual and people CAN STAY IN THEIR HOMES LONGER, WITH NO PAYMENTS.

So the servicer offers the homeowner FAKE / FRAUDULENT TRIAL PERIOD SCAMS / aka "Active Trial Modifications."

During the trial period the bank is foremost trying to figure out when they can foreclose on the homeowner and the Banks are getting all the foreclosure paperwork ready, while the homeowner is still paying a monthly trial period payment.

Foreclosures are mostly what the banks are looking for during the defrauding trial periods..

REMEBER, THE TRIAL PERIOD PAYMENTS ARE NOT BEING LEGALLY APPLIED TO YOUR LOAN AT ALL....

THE BOGUS TRIAL PERIOD PAYMENTS ARE IN HIDDEN NON TRANSPARENT ESCROW TYPE ACCOUNTS, WHICH THE BANK CAN DO WHATEVER THEY WANT WITH AFTER THEY FORECLOSE ON YOU THE HOMEOWNER.

THOSE TRIAL PERIOD FUNDS BECOMES FREE MONEY FOR THE SERVICER / BANK, WHEN THEY FORECLOSE - NO REFUNDS FOR YOU, IF THEY DO NOT MODIFY YOUR LOANS..

You see, few people will EVER RECEIVE A REAL PERMANENT MODIFICATION THROUGH ALL OF THEIR GOOD FAITH ACTIVE TRAIL PERIOD PAYMENTS !

Permanent mods are the last thing on the servicers minds.

Extorting as much money as possible, through fraudulent Active Trial Modification, time periods, is the first thing the banks are after, while they gather all the legal paperwork to first foreclose and then, only if necessary, the second thing on their minds is a permant mod

It is just a money grabbing game to them and we are forced to play, because we JUST MIGHT receive a Permanent and SUSTAINABLE MODIFICATION from them .... MAYBE.... ? A BIG MAYBE

Not likely for most though

BANKING FRAUD, WHICH EXTORTS MONEY FROM THE HOMEOWNER, WHICH IS NOT APPLIED TO THE LOAN, unless the Bank ever truly signs you into a perment modification, IS WHAT MANY ACTIVE TRAIL MODS REALLY ARE ABOUT ! TAKING YOUR MONEY $$$

The government should LEGALLY require ALL trial period funds to be REFUNDED to the homeowner, if the bank / servicer does not sign the homeowner into a PERMANT MODIFICATION !!

Shadow Inventory Dwarfs Loan Mods - Realty Check with Diana Olick - CNBC.com
 

SillyWorld

LoanSafe Member
This just came in the email today

Dear Mxxxx xxxxx:eek:
Thank you for taking the time to contact me about proposed plans for regulatory reforms to our financial system. I appreciate hearing from all Pennsylvanians about the issues that matter most to them.

The recent financial crisis has caused a number of legislative proposals to be presented that would significantly change the regulatory structure overseeing our financial system. Recently, President Obama unveiled an ambitious regulatory plan that would expand the powers of the Federal Reserve to supervise large banks and other financial institutions whose failure would be detrimental to the overall economy. Under President Obama's proposal, a new Consumer Financial Protection Agency would also be created to protect consumers from unfair, deceptive and abusive financial practices

Legislation has been introduced in the House of Representatives, which differs from the President’s proposal. At this time, no comparable legislation has been introduced in the Senate. As the financial services regulatory reform debate reaches the Senate, please be assured I will keep your concerns in mind and evaluate each proposal based on its ability to protect the citizens of Pennsylvania.

Again, thank you for sharing your thoughts on this important issue. Please do not hesitate to contact me in the future about this or any other matter of importance to you.

If you have access to the Internet, I encourage you to visit my web site, http://casey.senate.gov. I invite you to use this online office as a comprehensive resource to stay up-to-date on my work in Washington, request assistance from my office or share with me your thoughts on the issues that matter most to you and to Pennsylvania.

Sincerely,
Bob Casey
United States Senator

<!-- end of AOLMsgPart_2_7a8201d8-a5f8-4cee-8b5f-790d245fe9c4 --><STYLE>.AOLWebSuite .AOLPicturesFullSizeLink { height: 1px; width: 1px; overflow: hidden; } .AOLWebSuite a {color:blue; text-decoration: underline; cursor: pointer} .AOLWebSuite a.hsSig {cursor: default}</STYLE><LINK rel=stylesheet type=text/css href="http://o.aolcdn.com/cdn.webmail.aol.com/28828/css/microformat.css">
 

dthom

LoanSafe Member
Found this on the web. Talk about a modification horror story!


Bank Mistakenly Sells Couple's Home

Despite being up to date on their mortgage payments, a Phoenix couple mistakenly had their home placed in foreclosure and sold.
Jeff and Yanthy Zerner were approved for a mortgage modification with Chase just days before they received a notice giving them five days to vacate the property, a KPHO-TV, Phoenix story said. When Jeff Zerner contacted the number on the notice, he was told the house had been in foreclosure, and it had been bought.
Chase admitted the error and apologized to the couple, the story said. They are also meeting with the couple to work out a solution.


Work out a solution? How about Chase giving them the amount of the mortgage so they can get another home to live in. There is no apology that Chase could give to make up for this horrendous error.
 
N

nativelasvegan

Guest
If you want to take a proactive approach today, take a few minutes to sign this to send a message to BOA Chairman Walter Massey. SEIU.org | Tell BofA: No more Ken Lewises.

If you do not want to start taking action, just hang around here and listen to the depressing stories about how the banksters are not modifying loans.

Your choice.
 

Littlelost

LoanSafe Member
Ama,
Thank you for your wonderful help on how to calculate the LTV .. but I have the same question as hope67 .. what determines the NPV to positive or negative?.
 
Top