Saturday, January 29, 2011
Thursday, January 27, 2011
Barack Obama's 2011 State of the Union Address reminded me of the old Night Gallery Episode starring Clint Howard as Herbie.
I only watched the first 15 minutes of Barack Obama's 2011 state of the union speech. The pace, tone, and content reminded me of the above video clip from the old Night Gallery series, the episode starring Clint Howard.
Clint Howard (the child prodigy Herbie, who can predict the future), is Barack Obama.
Herbie's grandfather is Harry Reid.
The crazed female TV executive is Nancy Pelosi.
The women psychologist who gets Herbie to reveal he reads lots of books, is Oprah Winfrey.
You are viewing Swarm The Banks. Please check out Parallel Foreclosure blog and UNfair Foreclosures blog as well.
Friday, January 21, 2011
Barack Obama could recycle his Absent African American Dad speech and insert the phrase absent american banker in its place.
My guess is Banksters prefer to make a million dollars in two year's time rather than 3 million dollars over 30 years time because they can then immediately reinvest that one million on a new deal. The problem is by skimming such a huge profit off the front end of a cluster of 30 year securitized mortgages, there is less of a driving force remaining to make sure the mortgage agreement stands up for 30 years.
Example: The customer service for a securitized mortgage account suffers as the reduced profit margin now has to last for almost the same amount of time. It would be like buying a car from a dealership, and then 3 months later that particular dealership is gone.
Sure, you can go to another dealership, but because you did not buy the car from them, they made no profit from you when the car was sold and subsequently will have less interest in you than customers they actually sold cars to.
Worse still, because securitizing mortgages allows banksters to take their entire cut up front, the bankster can then cut and run. The bankster may then reinvest their prematurely ejaculated profits, either inadvertently, or intentionally, and create new investment ventures that may actually reduce employment opportunities that would have helped sustain the mortgage deals they already made and then walked away from.
Example: Banksters arrange mortgages for a small town that has a steel plant that employes many of the home buyers. Banksters then securitize the mortgages, but take their own cut up front, and run.
Banksters then use that upfront profit and invest in a plant in another country that can undercut the factory that is helping homebuyers pay off their homes.
It is of no advantage to the homeowner to have a disaffected bank that took their entire cut off of the top, and then resets their priorities elsewhere, it's like giving a drug user a pre-paid credit card with almost unlimited funds.
Example: You hire someone to do your taxes, and you really like them. You like them so much that you refer your friend to them. It turns out your friends tax return is much more involved than your own, and the person you hired ends up prioritizing your friends account over yours. That's what banksters are doing when they bundle and securitize a group of 30 year mortgages so they can just take an up front cut, and walk away.
Securitization equals the future foreclosure of the very homes that were securitized because flexibility to help the homeowner has been eradicated.
Yet Banksters continue to clamor for securitization, and it reminds me of Barack Obama and his speech about Absent African American fathers. Maybe it's time Barack Obama recycle his absent A.A. fathers speech and aim it at absent american bankers who don't want to be around the very brood they assisted in the purchasing of a home.
When listening to this Barack Obama speech, replace the phrase absent african american dads with absent american bankers.
Why don't absent american bankers want to hang around and raise their own mortgage deals, watch them turn from infant to child to teen to young adult, to maturity?
Why do the Absent American Bankers lust for securitization and playing the field even as they lure people 30 year mortgage deals? Does Barack Obama have the guts to stand up to the banksters and give them a tough love speech of the kind he has already given to african american dads?
Barack Obama seems willing to talk directly about the dereliction of fatherhood duty in the african american community, Barack Obama seems willing to talk somewhat condescendingly about gun loving bitter americans, when do we get to hear Barack Obama challenge the banking industry to keep their investments local.
You are viewing Swarm The Banks. Please check out Parallel Foreclosure blog and UNfair Foreclosures blog as well.
Wednesday, January 19, 2011
Breaking News, Opinionator reports that Arizona is proposing a Borrower's Bill of Rights.
Opinionator makes a great point when they assert, What is Good for GM is good for Homeowners as well. Arizona Homeowner's bill of rights is an essential starting point, but it is just a starting point.
You are viewing Swarm The Banks. Please check out Parallel Foreclosure blog and UNfair Foreclosures blog as well.
Tuesday, January 18, 2011
DealBreaker dot com, the place where investment bankers hang out, ridicule, and ban main street responders.
I have RSS feeds from both Deal Book and Deal Breaker listed on Swarm the Banks. I guess I mistook Deal Breaker for Deal Book this morning as I rushed to check out some blogs before heading out for a very buys day. lol, Deal Book and Deal Breaker are not the same thing.
Yes, I was banned from Deal Breaker. Would be nice if a few people visited them and absorbed their old school narcissism about investment banking and their lust for huge bonuses they allegedly "earn". If you banter, be polite, I'm curious if they ban anyone who disagrees with them.
Deal Book is open to various points of view, whereas Deal Breaker reminds me of the scene from The Fugitive when the bus careens off the road.
Imagine as the bus is flipping over and over down a never ending mountainside that people inside the bus are fighting each other to see who can grab onto the steering wheel to steer, that is the type of mentality I encountered at Deal Breaker, people seem completely oblivious to the plight of main street and their role in it, and they're arrogantly proud of it.
But know your enemy, because they really don't comprehend how out of touch they are, and the damage they continue to do to the country and the world with their securitization sleight of hand.
I doubt the posters are that old as they think nothing of ridiculing someone who uses a real name while they pose as anonymous.
You are viewing Swarm The Banks. Please check out Parallel Foreclosure blog and UNfair Foreclosures blog as well.
Sunday, January 16, 2011
Washington Post Article wants us to believe that Investors are now aligned with homeowners!
You are viewing Swarm The Banks blog . Please check out UNfair Foreclosures blog and Parallel Foreclosure blog as well.
Thursday, January 13, 2011
So many important foreclosure related articles in just the past day or so, here are links to just some of them.
January 13, 2010 and all of these important stories have come out in just the past day and a half.
Wednesday, January 12, 2011
Breaking News, the most important article regarding the future of our banks and homeowners you may read in 2011 has been written by Eleanor Bloxham.
I fell in love with the headline, Bankers: Quit selling your loans, and I loved the simple, straight forward approach Eleanor Bloxham takes regarding the banks infatuation with securitization.
So, can Wall Street explain to Main Street why their ongoing addiction to mortgage securitizations are a good thing for Main Street?
Tuesday, January 11, 2011
Mortgage mess: Worried your bank may go after your other assets if you're in foreclosure? - South Florida Sun-Sentinel.com
Mortgage mess: Worried your bank may go after your other assets if you're in foreclosure? - South Florida Sun-Sentinel.com by Doreen Hemlock
The article link above is another reason why I think the government's non response is to the mortgage crisis is basically criminal. Not only are some homeowners losing their original down payment and any actual equity built up in their homes, and not only are the new "homeowners" getting an incredible deal on their foreclosed home, the foreclosed homeowner may then become an indentured servant as well.
I believe members of our government have violated the Federal Hobbs Act, the extortion clause, by sanctioning the removal of property assets from homeowners under the color of right, even when they were apprised that wrongdoing was going on.
Monday, January 10, 2011
Swarm the Banks dot com and Parallel Foreclosure dot com welcomes UnFair Foreclosures dot com to its anti-financial terrorist family of blogs.
I don't know if it is a good day or not when I can launch another foreclosure blog called Unfair Foreclosures dot com and not have a problem finding material for it. During the month of January 2011, Unfair Foreclosures will be focusing on Cancer foreclosure victims who have to take their precious stamina reserved for fighting their cancer and instead have to divide it up so they can also fight the banksters trying to take their home.
Amazing isn't it, Banksters learned how to split and re split and split again the same home properties into wall street securitization investment schemes, while cancer victims have to learn how to split their remaining strength to fend off their own cancer, and the banksters foreclosure actions.
Our president appears to have spent the first half of his term fighting for healthcare reform while doing little to nothing for cancer foreclosure reform.
Saturday, January 8, 2011
Massachusetts Supreme Court Securitization Ruling was one that Swarm The Banks predicted in articles from late November and early December of 2010.
There have been many established bloggers over the past few years who have been warning about how fragile the securitization process was.
Swarm the Banks is pleased to have taken its own, less educated path to the same conclusion. In late November and Early December of 2010, Swarm the Banks simply stated that any change in terms to an original banking note should not be considered valid without the expressed written consent of the mortgage payer each and every time the mortgage note changed hands.
While it is easy to dismiss such a simplistic view of a complicated securitization process, the point Swarm the Banks was making is that no matter how convoluted a series of securitization processes are, there should be a common sense solution. It appears the Massachusetts Supreme Court is saying that there can be no change in terms without the approval of the mortgage payer with each and every transfer of the note.
If the Massachusetts Supreme court is not saying A Change in Terms with out the expressed written consent of the mortgage payer is prohibited, they should!
Thursday, January 6, 2011
Foreclosure Mediation being forced down the banksters throats one way or another.
Back in August of 2010, Swarm the Banks questioned why Florida Mediation proposals appeared to have been ignored. Now it appears that that city of Boston is also beating the same foreclosure mediation drum as well. Swarm the Banks applauds the City of Boston for initiating foreclosure mediation legislation.
Swarm the Banks also applauds The Legal Aid Society of Southwest Ohio for filing a lawsuit in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Ohio on behalf of John Sinclair. Their contention is that foreclosure mediation was not offered before foreclosure was initiated.
The mediation issue is huge. Suing for the right to negotiate prior to a foreclosure could result in untold numbers of homeowners filing copycat lawsuits who were also not given the chance to negotiate prior to foreclosure.
Lack of mediation rights falls in line with my overall criticism of securitizations. So perhaps my take on the Government using HAMP to swindle homeowners out of their homes may be valid as well.
Sunday, January 2, 2011
Yes, Hillary Clinton had a better home foreclosure plan than Barack Obama, and that is why Wall Street Chose Barack Obama over Hillary Clinton.
- Does anyone still wonder if the wrong democrat was nominated for president in 2008?
- Does anyone still wonder why Wall Street backed Barack Obama over Hillary Clinton?
- Does anyone see what a thorn Hillary Clinton would have been over the home foreclosure issue to Barack Obama's administration if she had stayed in Congress?
- Does anybody understand now, why Ted Kennedy publicly dissed Hillary Clinton in 2008 by bypassing her for the healthcare commission chair in the Senate, making it easier for her to accept Barack Obama's secretary of state role?
Does anybody see the hidden conspiracy in all of this, probably orchestrated by George Soros to keep Hillary Clinton out of the senate and out of the presidency as well?
I've written extensively about the democratic caucus cheating that went on during the 2008 democratic presidential nonmination process and how nothing has changed for the 2012 democratic presidential nomination process.
Maybe the best hope we have for 2012 is if several democratic challengers emerge and they all reduce Barack Obama's appeal to the point where Hillary Clinton is asked to be the nominee.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)