Lets look at what creates jobs, and what real stimulus is needed. First, jobs don't just fall from the sky, as the folks in Washington have suggested. Secondly, exercising simple logic and common sense here, we know that it's demand for goods and services that actually creates jobs. Now, if company XYZ is given tax breaks, does that automatically mean more demand for its' product? The answer is, of course not. So, the question is, "how can extra money on company XYZ's books, equate to more demand"? Another question worth consideration is, "are companies turning away business because they don't have the staff to satisfy the demand for their product or service?" Are you kidding me here? With businesses fighting for market share, and in an economic battle to survive during these harsh economic times, they're begging for more customers and orders.

Again, it's not money, or the lack of it, that's keeping employers from hiring, it's a lack of demand for their products and services.

So, how can we actually encourage hiring? The best stimulus for job growth and job stability, is Demand. We can generate demand by eliminating our import and energy dependency. How do we accomplish this? We can end our dependency on foreign imports through fair, equal, and balanced foreign trade. At present, our unfair and unjust one-sided foreign trade agreements and policies are American "Job Killers".

All of the talk coming out of Washington concerning stimulus money for small business America, to encourage and create jobs, is nothing more than political rhetoric that basically holds no water. In reality, Washington doesn't want to address the root causes for the lack of adequate living wage jobs. In fact, Washington encourages job out-sourcing, companies to relocate outside of our borders, and fully supports "job killers" such as NAFTA.

Bank loans aren't the answer to job creation, and neither are tax breaks and tax cuts. Real stimulus is DEMAND for products and services.

Opposition to this agreement is growing on the right. I think there is a real opportunity for a left/right populist coalition to come together to defeat this boondoggle.

I cannot believe this, but Donald Trump just did a phone interview on CNN that called cash on so many policies and he did not mince words! He basically said we're getting our ass kicked by China and these bad trade deals, he quoted the real unemployment rate at 18%, he said these multinational corporations are creating jobs abroad and the banks are only lending to go abroad.

He also blew off the China holds ~$900 billion in U.S. Treasuries issues, noting their currency manipulation and the carry trade.

I was SHOCKED! We need to find out more on his overall positions and he would run as a REPUBLICAN, which would completely force our most corrupt corporate party to have some U.S. representation instead and be an actual alternative to our other corrupt representation, the Democrats.

Wow, more like this. I still cannot believe Mr. Hair, Mr. reality show, Mr. Billionaire with flash and splash just cut to the chase and made the best sense I've heard out of any potential candidate in years.

He is considering running for the 2012 election, GOP primaries.

Wow.

i am on food stamps, my husband is a hard worker and got laid off cuz of the economic downfall. my mom was a manager for the des office the whole time i was growing up. you think i wana be on food stamps. you think i dont get tired of ramon and pband j ugh man some ppl. yes some ppl take advantage of it but not all people get real. its humiliating to have to go to welfare and pay for my food with food stamps to not be able to buy cookies for my kids school party. i hate it! i dont wana be on stamps and my husband and i are beating the pavement everyday to try and find work to be able to change our lives.

Grassley is a true surprise in pushing for this and I believe it's due to Caterpillar. He told a bold face lie that it means jobs in Iowa. Caterpillar is on this massive rampage to offshore outsource every job they can find, so this bad trade deal sure doesn't mean Iowa jobs.

sorry about the raw links - I've just sworn off typewriters so I have some catching up to do with the newfangled computer things.

I would like the following points regarding MERS to be clear to all:

1) It's not a PAPERWORK issue - it's an OWNERSHIP issue. Whenever we see the word 'paperwork' describing the MERS scam, we should know that the correct word is 'ownership'.

'Paperwork' is defined as: written or clerical work, as records or reports, forming a necessary but often a routine and secondary part of some work or job.

That is not the issue with MERS. The issue is one of fundamental ownership - which is determined by signed and recorded paper.

2) The most significant and basic nature of the MERS scam has not been discussed. It is, quite simply, that the obfuscatory nature of the MERS system allows the originating lender to sell the initial mortgage MORE THAN ONE TIME. I will demonstrate the implications with a simple example.

Now, it may never be possible to prove that the same mortgages were sold repeatedly. In fact, because of the very nature of MERS, it is likely that it would not be possible to show clear evidence. The point is, however, that by flaunting the existing, centuries-old state property laws, MERS allows for this to happen. It does not guarantee that it happened but it allows for it to happen. It may well be the real reason the chain of titles were broken and the 'paperwork' has all gone missing.

An example of the situation MERS allows and the financial implications:

Consider a pre-MERS/pre-securitization scenario for a real estate loan. Bank A originates a $500,000 loan. The $500,000 is used to pay the seller of the house. In exchange, Bank A will receive monthly payments for the next 30 years at (for example) 6 percent. If Bank A decides that it does not want to collect small amounts each month, then it may sell the rights to the bank that will pay them the highest price, Bank B. For whatever reason (its own belief on what constitutes a 'good interest rate') - Bank B may pay $525,000 for this loan. The assignment of the loan is done based on the stable, ancient property laws of the state, and Bank A has then made $25,000 profit on this transaction. Bank B then owns the loan and there is no ambiguity.

It would be hard to imagine Bank A being tempted to then sell the exact same loan to Bank C. The reason is that there is very clear evidence at the county recorder's office that the loan was already sold to Bank B.

Now consider the same situation with the MERS system in place.

Bank A makes the same original loan for $500,000 which is used to pay the seller of the house. Now, when it is interested in selling this loan to the highest bidder, Bank A realizes that because the way things operate now (regardless of state laws), it will not be selling the loan directly to another bank (Bank B above). Instead, it has become customary for Bank A to 'bundle' hundreds of loans together and sell them all to 'investors' who are probably made up of entities such as mutual funds, city governments, foreign governments, etc. Each of these entities likely represents many people's money - none of whom really have any idea of which individual loans they are purchasing.

Well, after all the bundling and selling to entities and stuff, it may turn out that, on average, Bank A gets $525,000 for each loan - and so in that way it made the same profit.

In this scenario it is not at all hard to imagine Bank A being tempted to sell this same loan again. Unlike before, when there was 'Bank B' and 'Bank C' and very clear records at the county recorder's office, there is no 'Bank B' but only a mish-mash of bundled loans sold to investors/entities who do not know which loans they have bought --- and by the way --- the documents have been 'lost'. In this scenario, it is all too tempting to sell this same loan to the securitized version of 'Bank C' - which is the same loan bundled with hundreds of other loans - sold to vague entities who do not know what they have really bought.

Comparing the two scenarios, one might think that Bank A has just doubled its profit. It has just sold the loan twice after all. Wrong! In the second scenario, Bank A has made more than 20 times its profit. In the original scenario, Bank A's profit is ($525,000 - $500,000) = $25,000. Of course, if the loan is fraudulently sold a second time, then all of the $525,000 from that sale would be (illegal) profit because there would be no transfer of $500,000 to the original seller of the house, as was done with the initial loan. Therefore, Bank A's profit would be ($25,000 + $525,000) = $550,000.

Bank A has increased its profit by 22 times simply by bundling/schmundling. Is that possible to prove? Probably not, given the destruction of so many documents and the entire system of banks/lawyers/politiicans/lobbyists, etc. But it is not necessary to prove any of this. It is only necessary to realize that the system allows for this, it encourages it, and it is likely the key driving dynamic to all we are seeing unfold. It is far more likely than the latest explanations in the media that banks "wanted to evade fees at the county recorders' offices".

It explains why we are where we are. The remedy, of course, is to adhere strictly to the state property laws which have been the same for centuries. These laws require clear, recorded, signed documents which do not allow the above confusion to exist. The courts must simply enforce these laws and let the chips fall where they may. If past foreclosures need to be voided, then so be it.

Fred Smith

I totally agree with the above article. For many decades now, the anti-America Washington Brotherhood has sold us out to foreign interests. Through unfair, unjust, and one-sided foreign trade agreements and policies, we've lost entire industries to cheap foreign labor.

"Global Economy" basically means "equalization to the lowest level", and we're not too far from that bottom. Due to anti-America agreements and policies, we've become import and energy dependent. And, as a result, we support foreign economies at the expense of our own.

Our living standards do not allow us to complete with cheap foreign labor, working in sweat shops which employ child labor. We can not be self-supporting working for $5.00 a day.

The obvious solution to our many economic woes, is to put America back to work, producing what America uses and consumes. This is accomplished by demanding fair, equal, and balanced foreign trade.

We have a rapidly growing population, and one that is very diverse as to education and skill levels. We must provide living wage opportunities that cover all education and skill levels. To accomplish this, we must produce goods and services via our own workforce, and wean ourselves from foreign made imports.

If the current trend continues, most indicators point to the U.S. becoming a third world nation in the not too distant future. We can not maintain our current socioeconomic status and standard, while encouraging a workforce to survive by living off of government assistance programs and unemployment checks.

In order to generate a positive cash flow within our own economy, we must first end our dependency on foreign imports. At present, our import and energy dependency allows our cash to flow more ourside of our borders than within them. This has to change if we're to provide living wage opportunities which cover all education and skill levels.

The benefits of a self-sustaining economy, through adequate employment opportunities, are many. Among them are sufficient tax revenue, decreases in poverty and homelessness, and consumer spendable income to support economic growth.

In summary, the cure-all is a pro-America government seated in Washington. We must rid Washington of the anti-America self-serving power hungry Washington Brotherhood, and elect those that see and understand the root causes for our devastating and shameful economic decline.

That's the big show. How will they create the money to cover the judgments in that one. However...in the long dead tradition of fair and balanced analysis, here's a thought. MBS sellers and purchasers are in court with the purchasers using the argument - we were sold a product steeped in fraud. We want our money back. This defense, and I'd appreciate it were I on a jury, might work. The incarnation of Melvin Belli stands up and says,

'My clients admit that there are problems with titles and other critical contractual matters dating back to the mid 90's. It's a fact that they created an entirely new system of handling titles etc. that was not sanctioned by state law. Furthermore, my clients admit that they found an eminent lawyer to endorse this practice as legal and, that they had serious doubts as the the validity of that opinion. They were entirely focused on creating a new market, particularly after the dot com crash, for large investors. That market was mortgage backed securities (MBS).

Having settled all that, the defense will prove this critical point. The market for MBS consisted of the elite of large investors: pension funds, banks, and those with extraordinary wealth. These investors don't buy on a whim. They are diligent in researching their investments as they proudly proclaim. They knew what my clients knew about the process of registering sales and tracking titles, including all of the shortcomings. If they have the nerve to claim that they didn't know, they should have known. But they knew.

Therefore, their claims are built on a foundation of deception. They were not innocent and naive investors. They were our partners in crime. The law does not allow, common sense does not allow, someone who participated in a crime to seek damages from their partner in crime based on the facts of the crime. We call on the plaintiffs to come to their senses, admit their knowledge of the defective products purchased, and withdraw their suit.'

That would be worth the price of admission.