Will John Key profit from NZ Foreign Debt?
Comments : 1 Comment »
Tags: 2011, auckland, bank of america, botany, FED, Federal Reserve Bank, guerilla media nz, John Key NZ, merrill lynch, NZ alternative media, NZ Foreign Debt, NZ Prime Minister Key, Penny Bright, Prime Minister John Key, profit from NZ Foreign Debt, Shares in Bank of America, Vinny Eastwood Show
Categories : Uncategorized
• Allows for warrantless searches of the homes of anybody detained by the Police.
• Allows the Police and other state agencies to take anything in ‘plain view’ during a raid, without having to specify it on a search warrant.
• Creates a provision called ‘residual warrants’. Residual warrants allow state agencies to use any new surveillance technology created, even if laws creating guidelines relating to its use have not been passed by Parliament.
• Grants the same powers the Police enjoy to 70 other state agencies including Work and Income New Zealand (WINZ) and the Pork Board.
• Effectively abolishes the right to silence by allowing Police and other state agencies to apply for ‘examination and production orders’ which force people to report for compulsory questioning and to surrender documents. The Human Rights Commission has raised concerns that these provisions could be used by police to harass trade unionists and political activists falsely accused of minor charges, such as trespass.
• Allows for state agencies to apply for a warrant for ongoing video surveillance of private property requiring only the same criteria needed for a one off search. In other Western countries, such as Canada, the USA and much of Western Europe, ongoing video surveillance of private property is considered a very serious breach of privacy, so Police must demonstrate to the courts that every other possible way of gaining the evidence has failed. No such restriction is included in this Bill.
“These rights should not even be granted to the Police, let alone 70 other state agencies” continued Mr Walker. “We must stand up to defend our freedoms”. Press Release: Cameron Walker
If this bill becomes law, the so-called right to silence will no longer exist. Using an Examination Order, the police can demand that you report to them for questioning. The criterion is that they suspect you of being involved with two or more others in the commission (or plotting) of any offence punishable by imprisonment, for example even trespass or disorderly behaviour would qualify.
The only way to refuse this order is to cite legal jargon: ‘Section 60 of the Evidence Act’ and claim ‘privilege against self-incrimination’. But even if you happen to know this, it may not help you – you can be ordered in front of a judge where you then have to offer evidence as to why you would be likely to
incriminate yourself if you talked. Catch-22.
Something else that changes with this bill, is the ‘right’ you have to not participate in proving your guilt. Current practice is that the police have to provide all the evidence – next year they can sit back and order you to produce some of that evidence. Instead of getting a search warrant, they will be able to apply for a Production Order. This order will require you to produce documents you are suspected of having (or will have) in the future and is available to any enforcement officer covered by the Act. If you refuse to supply the documentation they are after, the sentence is a maximum of a year’s imprisonment.
Surveillance devices are another invasive part of the bill. They include bugs, video cameras and tracking devices for cars.
Currently, there are no specific regulations around surveillance on private property. However, police need a warrant to enter your house and install a camera or bug. The bill introduces the concept of a surveillance device warrant, which can be obtained by any enforcement officer (not just police) under the same criteria as a search warrant – the suspicion that the search (or surveillance) will uncover evidential material necessary for the prosecution of a crime. This equates ongoing video surveillance with a one-off search.
There are also options for warrant-less searches. Once you’re arrested (or even just detained) the police and enforcement officers are able to search your home, workplace, car, friend’s home or any place with which you are associated, without a warrant – if they believe they can find evidential material related to the offence they’re holding you for. This power, combined with ‘plain view’ searches is a nightmare. Whilst you are sitting in the cells, your home can be turned upside down with no warrant.
Comments : 1 Comment »
Tags: civil rights nz, New Zealand Police, NZ Search and Surveillance Bill, Patriot Act, Police State NZ, Prime Minister John Key, Search and Surveillance Bill, warrantless searches NZ
Categories : Uncategorized
A new survey has found First Home Buyers are selling up in droves, no longer able to afford their houses purchased with the lurer of free money from the First Home Buyers Boost.
The survey, conducted by Mortgage Choice shows 10 percent of first home buyers who have purchased within the last two years have either sold or are selling up.
If interest rates rise a further 1 percent, another 6 percent said they would sell. An additional 14 percent would flood the market if rates rise 1.5 percent.
Andrew Robb, Shadow Minister for Finance and Debt Reduction said young homeowners “got totally suckered”.
“The Government propped up the market by luring in young people but there were no warnings about what might happen within a year or two – with interest rates in particular.”
“Now young people have had a double whammy because not only have interest rates added $6000 a year to typical repayments, the cost of living is soaring, with electricity prices up nearly 40 per cent in three years, water up 27 per cent and rates up 15 per cent.”
Treasury minutes about the First Home Saver Accounts (FHSA) released under freedom of information said “The short term stimulus [BOOST] was designed to encourage people who had already been saving for a home to bring forward their purchase and prevent the collapse of the housing market. Contrary to this measure, the FHSA is designed to encourage saving over the medium to long term.”
If the first home buyers boost was designed to prevent the collapse of the housing market, one has to wonder what the government’s plan was when the stimulus finished and the unsustainable housing market built on record levels of household debt starts to collapse again. You can’t keep propping it up.
Comments : Leave a Comment »
Tags: australian electricity prices, Australian Housing Market, Australian Real Estate, FHSA, First Home Buyers, First home buyers grant, First Home Saver Accounts, household debt aust, Mortgage Choice, short term stimulus, unsustainable housing market
Categories : Uncategorized
“The issue which has swept down the centuries and which will have to be fought sooner or
later is the people versus the banks.” Lord Acton
Borrower Signs the Bank’s Loan Contract and Mortgage
Borrower’s Signature transforms the Loan Contract into a Financial Instrument worth the Value of the agreed Loan Amount
Bank Fails to Disclose to Borrower that the Borrower Created an Asset
Loan Contract (Financial Instrument) Asset Deposited with the Bank by Borrower
Financial Instrument remains property of Borrower since the Borrower created it
Bank Fails to Disclose the Bank’s Liability to the Borrower for the Value of the Asset
Bank Fails to Give Borrower a Receipt for Deposit of the Borrower’s Asset
New Money Credit is Created on the Bank Books credited against the Borrower’s Financial Instrument
Bank Fails to Disclose to the Borrower that the Borrower’s Signature Created New Money that is claimed by the Bank as a Loan to the Borrower
Loan Amount Credited to an Account for Borrower’s Use
Bank Deceives Borrower by Calling Credit a “Loan” when it is an Exchange for the Deposited Asset
Bank Deceives Public at large by calling this process Mortgage Lending, Loan and similar
Bank Deceives Borrower by Charging Interest and Fees when there is no value provided to the Borrower by the Bank
Bank Provides None of own Money so the Bank has No Consideration in the transaction and so no True Contract exists
Bank Deceives Borrower that the Borrower’s self-created Credit is a “Loan” from the Bank, thus there is No Full Disclosure so no True Contract exists
Borrower is the True Creditor in the Transaction. Borrower Created the Money. Bank provided no value.
Bank Deceives Borrower that Borrower is Debtor not Creditor
Bank Hides its Liability by off balance-sheet accounting and only shows its Debtor ledger in order to Deceive the Borrower and the Court
Bank Demands Borrower’s payments without Just Cause, which is Deception, Theft and Fraud
Bank Sells Borrower’s Financial Instrument to a third party for profit
Sale of the Financial Instrument confirms it has intrinsic value as an Asset yet that value is not credited to the Borrower as Creator and Depositor of the Instrument
Bank Hides truth from the Borrower, not admitting Theft, nor sharing proceeds of the sale of the Borrower’s Financial Instrument with the Borrower
The Borrower’s Financial Instrument is Converted into a Security through a Trust or similar arrangement in order to defeat restrictions on transactions of Loan Contracts
The Security including the Loan Contract is sold to investors, despite the fact that such Securitization is Illegal
Bank is not the Holder in Due Course of the Loan Contract
Only the Holder in Due Course can claim on the Loan Contract
Bank Deceives the Borrower that the Bank is Holder in Due Course of the Loan Contract
Bank makes Fraudulent Charges to Borrower for Loan payments which the Bank has no lawful right to since it is not the Holder in Due Course of the Loan Contract
Bank advanced none of own money to Borrower but only monetized Borrower’s signature
Bank Interest is Usurious based on there being No Money Provided to the Borrower by the Bank so that any interest charged at all would be Usurious
Thus BANK “LOAN” TRANSACTIONS ARE UNCONSCIONABLE!
Bank Has No True Need for a Mortgage over the Borrower’s Property, since the Bank has No Consideration, No Risk and No Need for Security
Bank Exploits Borrower by demanding a Redundant and Unjust Mortgage
Bank Deceives Borrower that the Mortgage is needed as Security
Mortgage Contract is a second Financial Instrument Created by the Borrower
Deposit of the Mortgage Contract is not credited to the Borrower
Bank Sells the Borrower’s Mortgage Contract for profit without disclosure or share of proceeds to Borrower
Sale of the Mortgage Contract confirms it has intrinsic value as an Asset yet that value is not credited to the Borrower as Creator and Depositor of the Mortgage Contract
Bank Deceives Borrower that Bank is the Holder in Due Course of the Mortgage
Bank Extorts Unjust Payments from the Borrower under Duress with threat of Foreclosure
Bank Steals Borrower’s Wealth by intimidating Borrower to make Unjust Loan Payments
Bank Harasses Borrower if Borrower fails to make payments, threatening Legal Recourse
Bank Enlists Lawyers willing to Deceive Borrower and Court and Exploit Borrower
Bank Deceives Court that Bank is Holder in Due Course of Loan Contract and Mortgage
Bank’s Lawyers Deceive and Exploit Court to Defraud Borrower
Bank Steals Borrower’s Mortgaged Property with Legal Impunity
Bank Holds Borrower Liable for any outstanding balance of original Loan plus costs
Bank Profits from Loan Contract and Mortgage by Sale of the Loan Contract, Sale of the Mortgage, Principal and Interest Charges, Fees Charged, Increase of its Lending Capacity due to Borrower’s Mortgaged Asset and by Acquisition of Borrower’s Mortgaged Property in Foreclosure. Bank retains the amount of increase to the Money Supply Created by the Borrower’s Signature once the Loan Account has been closed.
Borrower is Damaged by the Bank’s Loan Contract and Mortgage by Theft of his Financial Instrument Asset, Theft of his Mortgage Asset, Being Deceived into the unjust Status of a Debt Slave, Paying Lifetime Wealth to the Bank, Paying Unjust Fees and Charges, Living in Fear of Foreclosure, and ultimately having his Family Home Stolen by the Bank.
Thus the BANK MORTGAGE BUSINESS IS UNCONSCIONABLE
Larry Hannigan’s Australia www.larryhannigans.com
Comments : Leave a Comment »
Tags: Bank, bank deceives borrower, Bank Loan, Bank loans in australia, Banking Australia, Borrowers financials, borrowers property, interest, Loan contracts, Mortgage, Mortgage in Australia, Mortgage Loans, usury
Categories : Uncategorized
Another weekend, another blabfest.
G20 finance ministers met in Paris. It seems they’ve agreed to hold another blabfest in April in some other fancy hotel in a fancy city.
Meanwhile, according to The Guardian, just 1992.5 kilometres away:
“Libya is defying international condemnation of a bloody crackdown that saw troops and mercenaries shooting unarmed demonstrators as the crisis spread to Tripoli and the death toll rose to more than 200.”
At the same time we noted:
“The [US] Senate on Tuesday voted to extend for 90 days the legal life of three post-Sept. 11 terrorism-fighting measures, including the use of roving wiretaps, that are set to expire at the end of the month.”
In the Middle East individuals are dying in the streets as they try to fight against despotic rulers. In the West individuals are told their rights must be infringed in order to protect their freedom!
It’s a funny old world.
Not that the West will worry too much about what’s happening in Libya. As long as the trouble stays within its borders. As The Guardian also notes:
“Libya, once treated as a pariah, has been embraced by western countries hungry for oil and lucrative investment opportunities since Gaddafi abandoned his support for terrorism, but there has been very little easing of domestic repression.”
But, the G20 had more important things to consider.
The finance ministers and central bankers needed to figure out how to prevent the next economic nightmare.
It looks as though they’ve just about got it nailed down… if you believe this communiqué that is:
“While not targets, these indicative guidelines will be used to assess the following indicators: (i) public debt and fiscal deficits; and private savings rate and private debt (ii) and the external imbalance composed of the trade balance and net investment income flows and transfers, taking due consideration of exchange rate, fiscal, monetary and other policies.”
Simply put it means the G20 is doing its darnedest to look as though it’s doing something. To look as though it can do something.
Having blabbed on for months about developing indicators that will help signal a potential economic meltdown, it seems they’ve finally settled on the bunch of statistics they’ll use.
Trouble is, how are these supposed indicators going to work? What will be the benchmarks? What level of debt is good, bad and just fine?
A recent report in The Washington Times stated:
“President Obama projects that the gross federal debt will top $15 trillion this year, officially equalling the size of the entire U.S. economy, and will jump to nearly $21 trillion in five years’ time.”
We wonder where that will show up on the new G20 indicators – good, bad or just fine.
And what about American personal debt levels, which according to the US Debt Clock now stands at USD$16.2 trillion. Although a survey by the Federal Reserve Bank of New York claims it’s really just a paltry USD$11.4 trillion.
Is that good, bad or just fine?
At the other end of the scale is Australia. The Australian Office of Financial Management (AOFM) – the government’s money managers – states total Australian government bonds on issue are $180.5 billion.
That’s just a fraction of US debt. So we’d have to think that’s good. In fact it’s roughly 1% the size of US government debt. So we’re OK.
Australia should be able to pass through the G20 financial body scanner clean as a whistle.
Oops! What was that?
“Can you remove your belt, shoes and pants sir, you seem to have a personal debt problem secreted somewhere.”
Ah yes, Australian private debt. The Reserve Bank of Australia (RBA) tells us that residential and personal debt totals $1.107 trillion…
Or, to put it another way, $49,064 per Australian citizen. If you compare that to US personal debt levels, there’s not so much of a difference. Personal debt per US citizen is $52,093.
So where’s that going to show up on these fancy new indicators? Good, bad or just fine?
But back to public sector debt levels. The following chart includes the debt levels of the four European members of the G20 – Italy, Germany, France and the UK:
These levels are already above the maximum determined by the two-decade old Maastricht Treaty. Exceeding the treaty is supposed to result in a fine for the EU member country.
In that case maybe they won’t worry about public sector debt levels after all. No, much better to look at private sector debt where Germany, France and Italy appear to be much better off in comparison:
These are older numbers (2008). But it shows you if Australia was on this chart, it would be on the left-hand side with the highest level of private sector debt as a proportion of GDP.
No wonder they’re waiting until April to decide how these supposed indicators will work. And we haven’t even looked at government budget deficits and savings rates, and all the other mumbo-jumbo the G20 says will act as a warning sign to the next crisis.
As we’ve shown before, the more the policymakers claim they’re working to prevent another crisis, the greater the chances another one will occur.
It’s the meddling what does it. The very idea that twenty nations – actually more than that when you consider the European Union representation on the G20 – can set aside their own agenda and objectively agree on independent indicators is ludicrous to start with.
I mean, let’s even play along and say that high public debt levels are a sign of a future crisis. Can we really imagine the US, Italian, French, German and UK government’s agreeing to any level below their current levels of public debt?
Of course not. It would be an admission of guilt.
By the same token, could we expect the Australian government to agree that personal debt above – for example – 70% of GDP is bad for an economy? Again, of course not. Not when it’s currently at 100% of GDP.
No, the blabbing will continue. The pointy-headed finance ministers will strut around telling you everything is being fixed… that everything is under control.
Meanwhile, as they play with their new indicators they’re trying to hide away the two indicators that show the true state of the global economy and where it’s heading – interest rates and inflation.
Having fiddled with both of them for short-term political gain even they must realise the current financial system is broke. But rather than admit it, they prefer to create another diversion.
They hope by the time the next crisis hits they’ll be out of office and living off a state pension.
Of course if things go really wrong, they may need to call in a favour from one of the despotic dictators they’ve helped prop-up for years. Perhaps that’s why Western leaders have been so slow to criticise the Arab rulers.
After all, one day Obama, Gillard, Rudd and Cameron may need to give Gaddafi and his pals a call and ask him if he’s got a spare room available!
for Money Morning Australia
Comments : Leave a Comment »
Tags: AOFM, Aust Reserve Bank, Australia Personal Debt, Australian Money Managers, Australian Office of Financial Management, Federal Reserve Bank, G20, g20 Finance ministers, Gross Federal Debt, Libya, Middle East, Money Morning Aust, RBA
Categories : Uncategorized