The Precedent is Set for the Cutting of Public Employee Pensions Across the Nation.

Is "Bankrupt" Detroit, in which "a judge [U.S. Bankruptcy Judge Steven Rhodes] in Michigan ruled that the bankrupt city of Detroit can impose cuts to its municipal pension plans" the new paradigm for dealing with "municipal bankruptcy" for the rest of the US? Now remember the "fictional municipal corporation government called the “City of Detroit” bankruptcy is a huge lie! Of course there is no mention of what Clint Richardson  refers to as "the legal crime operating behind these horrific scenes and reported in the Comprehensive Annual Financial Report (CAFR)."

“In case you haven’t heard, municipal bankruptcy is now all the rage. When smaller municipal corporations (only corporations can declare bankruptcy) had little resistance as test cases for these outrageous claims of fraudulent bankruptcy and default, the larger municipalities gained the confidence that the financially illiterate cesspool of people as citizens don’t know there heads from a hole in the wall when it comes to the financial reporting apparatus of government. The people were determined to be sufficiently ignorant of even the basic checking account balance of the general fund in their local governments and school districts, let alone the massive collective government investment scam robbing them of the entirety of their wealth, making it reasonable to assume that these municipal corporation’s financial position would likely never be challenged by that clueless mass of the indentured. And so the latest trend of conspiracy and fraud against those debt-slaves continues… this time in the not so great City of Detroit.

In other words, Detroit is a test case for the rest of the nation in the ongoing agenda of the predatory class to steal our wealth.

San Bernardino,, California, you're next.

“The ruling comes as a bankrupt California city, San Bernardino, edges closer to a possible legal showdown with CalPERS over the sanctity of public employee pensions. Although the decision in Detroit doesn’t directly affect what happens in San Bernardino, legal experts said it will strengthen the California city’s hand as it tries to reduce its multimillion-dollar pension obligations.

However, as Clint Richardson states:

“In short, the Governor of the great corporate State of California is lying to his taxpayers through the act of omission of these CAFR facts, by only referring to a hand selected portion of that CAFR, which is called the State’s annual budget report. While this should be tried as perjury, the laws of the State/Federal government protect him from this ever happening.

To help in your understanding, let’s say that you were to have a checking account with $1,000 and a savings account with $10,000 in two different banks, and that you only reported to the government that you had $1,000 dollars as your net worth because you don’t want to use your savings account to pay bills (taxpayer obligations) to government. You’d be audited and put in a federal debtor’s prison. But for government, the simple designation of “non-governmental” or “non-taxpayer” income and investment returns allows them to hide all of this wealth from the people and the “Budget Report”, while never mentioning the funds and wealth in the CAFR report. The only difference is that government does this legally – because government makes its own laws!

Why do they do this?

The answer is simple, really… TO JUSTIFY THE CONTINUATION OF, THE RAISING OF, AND CREATION OF NEW TAXES!!!

Public Employees’ Retirement Fund (CalPERS) – $241,761,791,000

Public Employees’ Health Benefits Fund (CalPERS) – $1,866,877,000

State Teachers’ Retirement Fund (CalSTRS) – $155,345,815,000

Teachers’ Health Benefits Fund (CalSTRS) – $598,000

Deferred Compensation Fund – $9,365,582,000

Judges’ Retirement Fund (CalPERS) – $54,146,000

Judges’ Retirement Fund II (CalPERS) – $575,833,000

Legislators’ Retirement Fund (CalPERS) – $123,476,000

State Peace Officers’ and Firefighters’ Defined Contribution Plan Fund (CalPERS) - $499,873,000

Supplemental Contributions Program Fund (CalPERS) – $19,658,000

Other pension and other employee benefit trust funds – $10,117,000

————————————————————————————-

TOTAL IN PENSION/EMPLOYEE BENEFIT FUNDS = $409,623,766,000

“...for this is the lie that is propagated to the public about the nature of pension funds. I would suggest you watch my documentary, The Great Pension Fund Hoax for a detailed look at pension funds.

In reality, the 270 billion dollars that is invested in CalPERS and the 200 billion that is in CalSTRS pension funds has nothing to do with paying for benefits, which total about 9 billion each year.

Calpers made a 27 billion gain in its investment pool after all benefits were paid to employees and retirees. So do you still think that these assets as investment funds (pension funds) are “liabilities:? How can they be liabilities if they are making massive profits after all liabilities are paid???

The truth is that pension funds grab TAXPAYER money out of the taxpayer base in order to “match” or pay for pension obligations – laws created to steal money and put it in the pension system. For every employee of the State, more money gets exacted from the public to pay into the pension system.

But here is the kicker… the employee has no equity in that money! While he or she can quit or get fired and take back what he contributed to the fund, the entire taxpayer contribution stays in the fund, and the employee cannot touch it. millions and millions of federal and state employees, each one supported by taxpayer money, and some pension funds do not require employee contributions, only government (the people) fund them with taxmoney. Ive seen the ration of contribution from 100% matching of employee funds to 45oo% of matched employee funds from the tax base. The employer is government and government is funded by taxmoney.

Now, with that said, it is your perception that is the problem. You perceive the good intentions of the pension system, and don’t comprehend the true corporate nature of it. You find justification for the above to support “retirement”, even though the purpose of pension funds was to extract taxmoney and invest it worldwide to build up the entire global economy for which pension funds are the largest holder of stock. And you, who may or may not receive a pension, believe that I (who does not recieve a pension) should pay for those employees who do. Why should I pay tax money to support a pension system that does not benefit me in any way, shape, or form, and in fact harms me by consolidating power and wealth into government hands?

Finally, you should know that if (or when) States begin to declare bankruptcy, which in my opinion is part of the master plan to rape the people once again, the pension system for that State will be taken, and no employees will see any of that money for retirement. Remember, a “contribution” is literally the act of giving away your money voluntarily. You do not own the money you have contributed, and can only get it back if you live long enough (which the fund hopes you don’t) and if the corporation doesn’t go bankrupt.

Again, the pension fund balances are not liabilities. The fund does what is called projections to guess what future liabilities will be. But as of today, any funds within the pension fund are profit.

I hope this helps…

-Clint-

Read more...

Bail-Ins: The Legal Framework is in Place to Continue Looting the American Public.

At the expense of the American public (devastating austerity and elimination of the middle-class), 2008 ushered in government bail-outs in order to preserve Wall Street's corrupt and bankrupt system., but what about government bail-ins (confiscation of bank deposits), the likes of which we saw occur in Cyprus, Greece? In addition to bail-outs, so far, we've been witness to severe austerity measures targeted at the masses, including sequestration, a dog-and-pony-show government shutdown, and massive cuts to food stamp that essentially puts a stranglehold on economic recovery (for the masses), not to mention the threat of default. There is no doubt that the intention is to strip away what is left of the social safety net at a time when its most needed. Meanwhile, J.P. Morgan, Goldman Sachs, Bank of America, Citibank, Deutsche Bank, etc., have not only evaded any and all consequences of their egregious actions, they are generously rewarded as they continue to gamble with taxpayer money. It doesn't take a rocket scientist to see what's going on here.

These austerity measures disproportionately affect children, seniors, and people with disabilities. According to the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities (CBPP), this recent $5 billion cut will average less than $1.40 per person per meal and jeopardize the strength of the current economic recovery. Moreover, according to the Center for American Progress (CAP) "each $1 billion dollar reduction in the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program eliminates 13,718 jobs," resulting in more than 68,000 job losses in the coming year.

Keep in mind that programs such as SNAP have what economists call a "multiplier effect"—in other words, "a dollar given to an entitlement recipient has amplified economic benefits. In this case, those consist primarily of the grocers who benefit when food stamp users shop in their stores. The estimated multiplier effect for food stamps is as high as 2 to 1."

The report, "Nourishing Change: Fulfilling the Right to Food in the United States," released by the International Human Rights Clinic (IHRC) at the New York University School of Law is timely as our government cut at least $5 billion-with many more cuts to come-- from the government's already inadequate $80 billion food stamp program, Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP), in the Farm Bill.  This report cites a study by the Center for American Progress, that calculates the "hunger bill" for the country, which includes the costs of treating illnesses and other medical conditions related to food insecurity, the impact of hunger on educational outcomes and lifetime earning potential, and the costs of running charity-based emergency food programs. For 2010, that bill came to $167.5 billion. For about half of that, $83 billion, the Center says we could extend the SNAP program to all food insecure households.

Okay, back to bail-ins.  It's the Dodd-Frank Act that passed in 2010-- it took up 848 pages at the time, as of July 2012 an additional 8,843 pages of rules were added, representing only 30% of the rules to-be-written. The estimate for the final length of the Act is 30,000 pages --that provides the legal framework for bail-ins.

According to the April 24, 2012 IMF report, conversion of bank debt to stock is an essential element of bail-in included in Dodd-Frank. “The contribution of new capital will come from debt conversion and/or issuance of new equity, with an elimination or significant dilution of the pre-bail in shareholders. ...Some measures might be necessary to reduce the risk of a ‘death spiral’ in share prices.” In the language of Dodd-Frank, this will “ensure that unsecured creditors bear losses.”

Under the existing legislation, the FDIC has the power to impose losses on unsecured creditors in the process of resolving failing banks. For example, the FDIC resolved Washington Mutual under the least-cost resolution method in 2008 and imposed serious losses on the unsecured creditors and uninsured depositors (deposit amount above USD 100,000). The Orderly Liquidation Authority (OLA) established under the Dodd-Frank Act further expands the resolution authority of FDIC. Subject to certain conditions, the FDIC now also has the powers to cherry-pick which assets and liabilities to transfer to a third party and treating similarly situated creditors differently, eg: favoring short-term creditors over long-term creditors or favoring operating creditors over lenders or bondholders. -- Economist, Nouriel Roubini

The U.S. is far from the only nation with provisions for bail-ins:

Bail-In Rules for Eurozone Banks Should Start In 2016

Bondholders Bail-in Shows Alternative Method to Rescue Banks

Bank Bail-in Rules Confirmed


But who cares, right? The stock market's soaring to new heights while income disparity continues to widen at unprecedented levels.

Read more...

The Bankruptcy Law Changes of 2005, Rehypothecation, MF Global, and Crisis.

Did you know that the changes made to the bankruptcy laws reordered the subordination of creditors? It's true. Bondholders used to be the most senior of creditors in a bankruptcy. Now, derivative holders are the most senior. That means derivative counterparties gained a strong bankruptcy privilege, according to Prof. Dr. Enrico Perotti, professor of international finance at Amsterdam Business School.

The special bankruptcy treatment extended to mortgage-backed repos and derivative transactions in 2005 played a crucial role in the financial crisis of 2008. Because they were the two main sources of systemic risk in the financial crisis of 2008.

Professor Perotti outlined how over the 2002-2005 period, bankruptcy laws were changed in all EU countries and the US, and secured financial credit (repos) and derivative counterparties gained a strong bankruptcy privilege, amounting to de facto “superiority”, as counterparties could gain immediate repossession of collateral in default (so-called “safe harbor claims”, as opposed to having to accept the “automatic stay” which protects the debtor in Chapter 11 for example)..

With that in mind, consider that banks/ securities brokerage, rehypothecate assets, including 401k, IRA, and even general savings accounts allow the rehypothecation of their assets. Check the fine print of your account agreement.

What is rehypothecation?

It is the practice that allows collateral posted by, let's say, a hedge fund to its prime broker to be used again as collateral by that prime broker for its own funding. In other words, if a firm rehypothecates its assets with its client's assets - co-mingling client funds - and then uses these funds to buy derivatives, the derivative holder can lay claim to the brokerage assets if that firm declares bankruptcy. If this is allowed to continue, it will set a precedent that will enable creditor firms to raid and steal your assets.

This is part of the reason JP Morgan was able to seize MF Global's assets the moment they claimed bankruptcy.

So, it's possible that the next time a firm fails, whomever is the counterparty on the bankrupt organization's credit default swap, will have precedent to step in and steal client money to settle their claims.

For a  less alarmist view which goes into great detail, see:

Revisiting Rehypothecation: JP Morgan Markets Its Latest Doomsday Machine (or Why Repo May Blow Up the Financial System Again)

Read more...

More and More Americans Forgo Medical Care Due to Cost

The US is the only wealthy, industrialized nation that does not have a universal health care system, and average working Americans are paying the price.   Moreover, although Americans spend twice as much on healthcare as people in other developed nations; in return, they receive lower quality and less efficient medical care.

52 million Americans have no health insurance. 41% of working age Americans have medical bill problems, not to mention, medical bills prompt more than 60% of U.S. bankruptcies, and 45,000 annual deaths are associated with lack of health insurance, according to a study published by the American Journal of Public Health.

In the meantime, while health insurers are posting record profits, an increasing number of Americans are going without medical care because they can't afford it.

More working-age Americans are going without health insurance and not seeking physician care for injuries or illness because they can't afford it, according to two new studies released in March.

A report by the New York-based Commonwealth Fund found that the portion of patients delaying medical treatment in the last year is trending upward. Findings from the group's biennial health insurance survey in 2010 show that an increasing percentage of working-age adults skipped office visits, medical tests and prescriptions because of costs.

■Money troubles mean less care
■Medicaid pay commission releases first report
■See related content
■Topic: Uninsured
Many survey respondents are going without health coverage after losing a job during the economic recession, said Sara Collins, an author of the Commonwealth Fund study.

"This is largely because there are few affordable options for health insurance when job-based coverage is lost," she said. "We found that more than 70% of an estimated 26 million adults who tried to buy coverage in the individual market in the past three years reported difficulties finding affordable plans that met their needs. Nine million were turned down, charged a higher price or had a condition excluded from their coverage because of a preexisting condition."

An estimated 43 million working-age adults reported that they or their spouses lost their jobs within the past two years, according to the study. Among those reporting a job loss, nearly half said they initially lost health benefits, too. Only 14% of those people continued coverage through COBRA, while a quarter were able to go on their spouses' insurance plans or find coverage elsewhere. This meant 57% of those losing both a job and health coverage were added to the ranks of the uninsured.

16% of U.S. working-age adults were contacted by a collection agency for unpaid medical bills in 2010. The number of uninsured adults rose during the last decade to an estimated 52 million, or 28% of the working-age population, from 38 million, or 24%. The rate of young adults and minorities without coverage is relatively high -- 44% of 19- to 29-year-olds, 51% of Hispanics and 37% of blacks.

The study found that those with insurance are paying more for their coverage. Premiums in employer plans increased 41% between 2003 and 2009, and deductibles rose 77%. Nearly half of working adults spent at least 10% of their income on out-of-pocket costs and premiums in 2010.

The organization Families USA in Washington, D.C., conducted a similar study with the Lewin Group, based in Falls Church, Va., and found out-of-pocket costs are rising and becoming a burden for more Americans. A cap under the new health system reform law on what consumers will be expected to pay will curb spending increases starting in 2014, the group said. In the meantime, the study estimates that 15 million Americans younger than 65 will be spending a combined $24.7 billion above those cap levels this year.

"These families are terribly vulnerable to financial devastation caused by unexpected illness or injury, and they generally face only bad alternatives, including massive credit card debt," said Ron Pollack, executive director of Families USA.

In 2011 dollars, the upcoming cap is $5,950 for individuals and $11,900 for families with incomes between 200% and 300% of the federal poverty level, Pollack said.

The Commonwealth Fund estimates that nearly a third of non-Medicare adults had problems paying medical bills in 2010 and that 16% were contacted by a collection agency for unpaid medical bills.

Links:


Help on the Horizon: How the Recession Has Left Millions of Workers Without Health Insurance, and How Health Reform Will Bring Relief—Findings from The Commonwealth Fund Biennial Health Insurance Survey of 2010

Read more...

Distressed and Underserved Community

The majority of all bankruptcies are the result of medical bills according Medical Bankruptcy in the United States, 2007: Results of a National Study. . That's 20% higher than results indicated in 2001.

Of those who filed for bankruptcy in 2007, nearly 80 percent had health insurance. Respondents with insurance reported average expenses of just under $18,000. Respondents without insurance had average medical bills of nearly $27,000.

Since 2007, the number of Americans without insurance has increased and filing for bankruptcy has become more difficult due to more stringent laws, according to the report.

Using a conservative definition, 62.1% of all bankruptcies in 2007 were medical; 92% of these medical debtors had medical debts over $5000, or 10% of pretax family income. The rest met criteria for medical bankruptcy because they had lost significant income due to illness or mortgaged a home to pay medical bills. Most medical debtors were well educated, owned homes, and had middle-class occupations. Three quarters had health insurance. Using identical definitions in 2001 and 2007, the share of bankruptcies attributable to medical problems rose by 49.6%. In logistic regression analysis controlling for demographic factors, the odds that a bankruptcy had a medical cause was 2.38-fold higher in 2007 than in 2001.

In addition, the Federal Reserve released the 2009 List of Middle-Income Nonmetropolitan Distressed or Underserved Geographies, in which revitalization or stabilization activities will receive Community Reinvestment Act consideration as “community development.” The designations reflect local economic conditions, including such triggers as unemployment, poverty, and population changes.

Federal Financial Institutions Examination Council (FFIEC): The criteria used to designate these areas can be found here.

Read more...

Bankruptcy Law Backfires.

As everyone rushed to file bankruptcy before the new bankruptcy laws went into effect, credit card issuers previewed what was to come of their $25 million dollar investment to strengthen bankruptcy laws that they thought would protect credit card profits and make people lifelong slaves to debt. It's not working out the way they had hoped.

Read more...