Thanks for the comments. Your remarks are neatly reenforced in Modern Money Mechanics pages 1-6. The rest of the book is immaterial. The fed quit publishing this book years ago but if you do a search using those three words you will find it verbatim.

Here’s the real problem – How many people will understand it? I can tell you first hand what happens to a person who preaches exactly what this book says. Big brother can say it, but you better not is all I’ll say.

Has anyone read the Mortgage Bankers Association of America’s Mortgage Banking Terms? Check out the definition of “borrower”:

Borrower: One who receives funds in the form of a loan with the obligation of repaying the loan in full with interest. MBA. Mortgage Banking Terms: A Working Glossary (8th Edition, 1997) p. 19

Hmmm…let’s analyze that:

Form: In contradistinction to “substance,” “form” means the legal or technical manner or order to be observed in legal instruments or juridical proceedings, or in the construction of legal documents or processes. Antithesis of “substance.” Black’s Law Dictionary (6th Edition, 1990) p. 651, col. 2

Substance: Essence; the material or essential part of a thing, as distinguished from “form.” That which is essential. Black’s Law Dictionary (6th Edition, 1990) p. 1428, col. 1

Now lets couple that with the FACT that there is NO “MONEY” in circulation, only “credit” instruments, and the FACT that “credit instruments” are ALL (and all means all all the time) “promises to pay” and what do we have? NO LOANS. But the banks get your labor, and property if you don’t labor for a one-sided debt.

I find it amusing how this guy says “[t]his process is not intended to help you get your house for free,” and “[i]t’s about fairness.” Is it fair that the bankers risk nothing and you risk being homeless and your life turned upside for at the least 7 years?

Is it fair that you are not taught the laws of contract and commerce in elementary school and have to “hire” someone to “read” for you? How do you know if the one doing the reading for you is not in league with the one he’s supposed to be assisting you with? You wouldn’t know. Which although it seems like help from this guy, (an attorney) who seems to be forgetting or ignoring the “law of contract” not to mention the statutory requirements for real property. I.e. (i) under the law of contract it’s a “BREACH OF CONTRACT” and this kind of breach ENDS any obligation and no one should have to continue paying (sic), and (ii) doesn’t statutory law “require” that ALL real property agreements be in “writing?” When you make a “new” agreement regarding the real property, isn’t it “required” by statutory law to be “in writing?”

Is it fair that children are given as part of their curricula assignments to “sign” papers (with their parents no less) student contracts without being taught the weight of their “signatures” and potential consequences, and then be expected to instantly know when they graduate this “learning” institutions and seek out jobs that require “signatures” on their employment “contracts?” I find it strange that ANYONE would think this is harmless just because its not enforceable in a court of equity or law due the children being minors. It is conditioning that results in the problems that are present today with this foreclosure fiasco and will only compound.

Is it fair that after all this we have some smart a$$’s denigrating homeowners because they got in over their heads. Or making asinine comments about if they can’t afford to hire somebody they don’t deserve a house, or did they “read” what they “signed” or comments of similar idiocy. These people (bankers and lawyers) go to SEMINARS and HOLD CONVENTIONS to write MANUALS on how to structure these contracts. And then the lowly consumer is expected to read and KNOW this. GET REAL!

We won’t even discuss the illegalities and bogus “lending” of securitization. I.e. the so-called lender being in actuality a “originator/servicer” Neither of which involve the actual “lending” of money.

I could go on and on. But bottom line is why are the banks so protected from the laws of commercial nature? Why does it not make sense that everybody with an account and funds in their account can’t all at one time go and demand their balances without financially ruining the bank. Wasn’t the “agreement/contract” that account holders be provided “their” funds back “on demand?” This is more of ignorance of the laws of contract and commerce.

This tirade can be summed up by the quote of former president John Adams: “All the perplexities, confusion, and distress in America arise, not from defects in the Constitution or Confederation, not from want of honor or virtue, so much as from downright ignorance of the nature of coin, credit and circulation.”

Their has been no truer statement. As THAT would put an end to all this financial carnage going on.

Just my .02

Here are 2 sites with info about Henry Paulson’s speech in which he talks about the new face of regulation in the investment/bank arena:

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/03/26/AR2008032601140.html?nav=rss_politics

http://berniehund.com/2008/03/31/henry-paulsen-shows-off-his-new-regulatory-plan/

As a secretary he is responsible for floating the trial balloons to see what will and what won’t be acceptable in the legislation that will make it through Congress. Pay attention to the reorganization of the investment sector. Also, don’t be afraid to read between the lines because that is exactly where the real scoop lies.

Just my 2¢. Oh, before I forget, practice saying Comrade in Spanish.

The investment banks already fall under the SEC so they have been “taken over” so to speak. The proposal I mention will either abolish the SEC or move it under the fed as well.

I will have to google Henry Paulsen as he supports this idea. He has made a speech or two about this plan so the proposal should be easy to find.

Here is a point many people don’t understand – if the government created it, they can abolish and/or alter it. All agencies fall under this rule. End of story. I live w/a real life example. My wife is a disabled veteran who uses the VA. I won’t go into specifics but take my word for it, the workings of this agency are a perfect example.

BTW, martial law exists and is codified in 12 USC 95(a) and (b). I believe a simple executive order is all that is needed to bring it to life. The patriot act is another example. Only it is martial law in parts.

These illegals have to live somewhere. Guess what just became available? Over 2 million homes. If the guvmint takes over the investment houses it takes over their bad loans (read foreclosed and empty properties). The new occupant gets to buy it at a bargain price and with a bargain interest rate.

I would bet if one toured the CA Central Valley and/or the San Diego Valley one would see this program already in place. I have no intention of driving about 6 hours one way to research my opinion so anyone still living there who reads this post please comment.

BTW, I make no apologies at the tender age of 63 for my feeling of Americans first. My ancestors came through Ellis Island and didn’t demand those living here at that time change their customs and laws. They didn’t demand they be given free medical, free schools and free housing. But that’s another story.

James – Self Directed IRA, brilliant as the Guiness boys say in their commercial.

Avoid Foreclosure – yes, those items mentioned on the referenced site certainly are methods. Unfortunately they are the man’s way of keeping his boot on your neck. He gets everyone running with the same procedures and pretty soon he closes the gate and they are no longer wild, just captive.

In other words, the pablum is simply published and republished and really doesn’t work. Once people see it doesn’t work they look at the savior who happens to be the same wizard who created the problem.

His answer is federalization. And, scary, it seems to be working. After all, there oughta be a law…

Just my 2¢.