"OCCUPY WALL STREET"

Status
Not open for further replies.
CHEEZMO™ said:
You just made me laugh. Kudos!


JrLaN.png


It's hard to stay dry in the rain.

10352432.jpg
 
el retorno de los sapos said:
Which complants are supported by the majority of the people? You showed that some people agree with certain solutions to certain problems but not with these complants.

Might want to read my posts again, because I already answered that. Most people do not view the banks favorably, that's hardly new knowledge.
 
So, when we freeze forclosures for people not paying their mortgage, does this mean I don't have to pay my mortgage either?

I bought a house I could afford and pay every month, but 6 months to a year free and clear of having to pay would certainly be nice!
 
akira28 said:
They need a support regiment. People providing material and food, etc. People off site making new signs for them, etc. It'll happen if they keep it up.

The New York transit union is providing food and clothing for the protesters.
 
theignoramus said:
http://i51.tinypic.com/296i2iq.jpg[IMG][/QUOTE]

Interesting, current article has the first line amended to: "In a tense showdown above the East River, the police arrested about 500 demonstrators from the Occupy Wall Street protests [b]who took to the roadway as they tried to cross the Brooklyn Bridge on Saturday afternoon[/b]."

Link:
[url]http://cityroom.blogs.nytimes.com/2011/10/01/police-arresting-protesters-on-brooklyn-bridge/?hp[/url]
 
el retorno de los sapos said:
No I´m just trying to highlight the fact they agree on something. It doesn´t belittle the point. But why can´t someof these guys at this rally support the tea party members when they talk about how the bailouts where unfair instead of just decrying the entire movement as a corporate façade?
Becuase this is politics, and first rule of politics is you dehumanize your opponent. Saying "well they were right about that." doesn't really help the cause.

It is today as it will always be.
 
Drkirby said:
Look at the authors, the two articles were written by different people.

So Alan Baker is the corporatist schill with an account at JPmorgan that put a gun to Colin Moynihan's head ?
 
omg.kittens said:
I'm assuming fortified_concept meant pepper spray. Simple mistake to make. Actually, isn't "gassing somebody" and "pepper spraying somebody" used pretty interchangibly? Certainly nothing to lol about..


You're kidding, right?

Gas and pepper spray are completely different.
 
remnant said:
Becuase this is politics, and first rule of politics is you dehumanize your opponent. Saying "well they were right about that." doesn't really help the cause.

It is today as it will always be.

Still didn't answer my question....
 
Boogie said:
You're kidding, right?

Gas and pepper spray are completely different.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pepper_spray
Pepper spray, also known as OC spray (from "Oleoresin Capsicum"), OC gas, and capsicum spray, is a lachrymatory agent (a chemical compound that irritates the eyes to cause tears, pain, and even temporary blindness) that is used in riot control, crowd control, and personal self-defence, including defence against dogs and bears.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mace_(spray)
Chemical Mace is a tear gas in the form of an aerosol spray which propels a lachrymatory agent mixed with a volatile solvent. It is sometimes used as a self-defense device. This form of Mace is legal in very few countries, thus its use is becoming uncommon.

I can see why he said it.
 
x Power Pad Death Stomp x said:
So, when we freeze forclosures for people not paying their mortgage, does this mean I don't have to pay my mortgage either?

I bought a house I could afford and pay every month, but 6 months to a year free and clear of having to pay would certainly be nice!

Something needs to be done:

http://www.rollingstone.com/politic...-helping-banks-screw-over-homeowners-20101110

The foreclosure lawyers down in Jacksonville had warned me, but I was skeptical. They told me the state of Florida had created a special super-high-speed housing court with a specific mandate to rubber-stamp the legally dicey foreclosures by corporate mortgage pushers like Deutsche Bank and JP Morgan Chase. This "rocket docket," as it is called in town, is presided over by retired judges who seem to have no clue about the insanely complex financial instruments they are ruling on — securitized mortgages and laby­rinthine derivative deals of a type that didn't even exist when most of them were active members of the bench. Their stated mission isn't to decide right and wrong, but to clear cases and blast human beings out of their homes with ultimate velocity. They certainly have no incentive to penetrate the profound criminal mysteries of the great American mortgage bubble of the 2000s, perhaps the most complex Ponzi scheme in human history — an epic mountain range of corporate fraud in which Wall Street megabanks conspired first to collect huge numbers of subprime mortgages, then to unload them on unsuspecting third parties like pensions, trade unions and insurance companies (and, ultimately, you and me, as taxpayers) in the guise of AAA-rated investments. Selling lead as gold, shit as Chanel No. 5, was the essence of the booming international fraud scheme that created most all of these now-failing home mortgages.

The rocket docket wasn't created to investigate any of that. It exists to launder the crime and bury the evidence by speeding thousands of fraudulent and predatory loans to the ends of their life cycles, so that the houses attached to them can be sold again with clean paperwork. The judges, in fact, openly admit that their primary mission is not justice but speed. One Jacksonville judge, the Honorable A.C. Soud, even told a local newspaper that his goal is to resolve 25 cases per hour. Given the way the system is rigged, that means His Honor could well be throwing one ass on the street every 2.4 minutes.

Judge Soud seems to have no clue that the files he is processing at a breakneck pace are stuffed with fraudulent claims and outright lies. "We have not encountered any fraud yet," he recently told a local newspaper. "If we encountered fraud, it would go to [the state attorney], I can tell you that." But the very first case I see in his court is riddled with fraud.

Kowalski has seen hundreds of cases like the one he's presenting this morning. It started back in 2006, when he went to Pennsylvania to conduct what he thought would be a routine deposition of an official at the lending giant GMAC. What he discovered was that the official — who had sworn to having personal knowledge of the case — was, in fact, just a "robo-signer" who had signed off on the file without knowing anything about the actual homeowner or his payment history. (Kowalski's clients, like most of the homeowners he represents, were actually making their payments on time; in this particular case, a check had been mistakenly refused by GMAC.) Following the evidence, Kowalski discovered what has turned out to be a systemwide collapse of the process for documenting mortgages in this country.

If you're foreclosing on somebody's house, you are required by law to have a collection of paperwork showing the journey of that mortgage note from the moment of issuance to the present. You should see the originating lender (a firm like Countrywide) selling the loan to the next entity in the chain (perhaps Goldman Sachs) to the next (maybe JP Morgan), with the actual note being transferred each time. But in fact, almost no bank currently foreclosing on homeowners has a reliable record of who owns the loan; in some cases, they have even intentionally shredded the actual mortgage notes. That's where the robo-signers come in. To create the appearance of paperwork where none exists, the banks drag in these pimply entry-level types — an infamous example is GMAC's notorious robo-signer Jeffrey Stephan, who appears online looking like an age-advanced photo of Beavis or Butt-Head — and get them to sign thousands of documents a month attesting to the banks' proper ownership of the mortgages.

This isn't some rare goof-up by a low-level cubicle slave: Virtually every case of foreclosure in this country involves some form of screwed-up paperwork. "I would say it's pretty close to 100 percent," says Kowalski. An attorney for Jacksonville Area Legal Aid tells me that out of the hundreds of cases she has handled, fewer than five involved no phony paperwork. "The fraud is the norm," she says.

Kowalski's current case before Judge Soud is a perfect example. The Jacksonville couple he represents are being sued for delinquent payments, but the case against them has already been dismissed once before. The first time around, the plaintiff, Bank of New York Mellon, wrote in Paragraph 8 that "plaintiff owns and holds the note" on the house belonging to the couple. But in Paragraph 3 of the same complaint, the bank reported that the note was "lost or destroyed," while in Paragraph 4 it attests that "plaintiff cannot reasonably obtain possession of the promissory note because its whereabouts cannot be determined."

The bank, in other words, tried to claim on paper, in court, that it both lost the note and had it, at the same time. Moreover, it claimed that it had included a copy of the note in the file, which it did — the only problem being that the note (a) was not properly endorsed, and (b) was payable not to Bank of New York but to someone else, a company called Novastar.

Much more at the link.
 
moop2000 said:
You:


Me:


I was curious what you thought about it is all.
If the government should pay for your education? People pay for K-12 and various state grants through local and state taxes. Whether or not the federal government should pay for it wholesale is something left to citizenry vote. Either way it isn't a human right imo.
 
remnant said:
If the government should pay for your education? People pay for K-12 and various state grants through local and state taxes. Whether or not the federal government should pay for it wholesale is something left to citizenry vote. Either way it isn't a human right imo.

But the argument was for higher education, correct?
 
kame-sennin said:

Still doesn't answer my question. In the world where Occupying Wall Street gets all their demands, what happens to people who have been paying their mortgages all this time? We're suckers for not having bought bigger houses than we could afford or not reading the contract before signing it?
 
x Power Pad Death Stomp x said:
Still doesn't answer my question. In the world where Occupying Wall Street gets all their demands, what happens to people who have been paying their mortgages all this time? We're suckers for not having bought bigger houses than we could afford or not reading the contract before signing it?

The point is to prevent people from fraudulently being evicted from their homes. That's a greater injustice that someone paying for a mortgage just before a foreclosure moratorium goes into affect. Further, the moratorium is not meant to be indefinite. In my opinion, the goal should be freeze foreclosures long enough for federal regulators to clean up the process.

Btw, the new thread is up:

http://www.neogaf.com/forum/showthread.php?t=447099
 
kame-sennin said:
The point is to prevent people from fraudulently being evicted from their homes. That's a greater injustice that someone paying for a mortgage just before a foreclosure moratorium goes into affect. Further, the moratorium is not meant to be indefinite. In my opinion, the goal should be freeze foreclosures long enough for federal regulators to clean up the process

Btw, the new thread is up:

http://www.neogaf.com/forum/showthread.php?t=447099



Even the article you provided placed blame on home buyers to some extent. ANY sort of move to have a foreclosure moratorium would have to very carefully and studiously implemented AND explained to the general public.

If you want to see REAL rioting in the streets, tell millions of responsible home owners that they've been paying their mortgage for the last 10 years for no reason.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top Bottom