Margin Call on America

[Guest]

Yes, there is a difference.

Stagflation is the condition of money losing value rapidly while at the same time the economy is in modest negative real growth.

The Great Depression in the US had only negative net growth while the purchasing power of the cash that people had was pretty constant.

If you combine massive negative net growth AND rapid uncontrolled loss of purchasing power of the cash that people currently hold, you end up with something more akin to Germany circa 1924.

[cystic crypt]

@ncscswitch:

Yes, there is a difference.

Stagflation is the condition of money losing value rapidly while at the same time the economy is in modest negative real growth.

The Great Depression in the US had only negative net growth while the purchasing power of the cash that people had was pretty constant.

If you combine massive negative net growth AND rapid uncontrolled loss of purchasing power of the cash that people currently hold, you end up with something more akin to Germany circa 1924.

right.
So, if as Jen says, the US dollar buys more-or-less what it used to (in Canada, inflation is around 3.5% including gas, 1.5% not including gas - i assume the US is not too far off), then purchasing power is constant.  The $64,000 question, is whether a combination of the factors i discussed initially will contribute to negative growth.  Again - maybe not similar to the great depression, but at least similar to the '70s (although i do not see interest rates hitting 20% again).

[Imperious Leader]

don’t buy stocks, commodities, metals, or foreign currency. Its not stable right now.
Buy income properties with no rent control and nothing else. People losing homes move to apartments. People losing 401 and stock value move into apartments. People who cant meet the debt service move into apartments. Right now the inventory in large cities is drying up because 1) large cities know they are growing and need to meet the needs of growing population and install rent control in many buildings, while this has the effect of making buildings that are still not rent control have much more value. 2) the cost of construction is higher and also tied to allocate low income housing to get permits. This drives up non-rent control buildings.

the window will close in the fall of next year, so use the time wisely.

[Guest]

The problem CC is that Inflation is NOT as low in the US as your Canada figures.  It is not even as low as our own figures.

According to most financial folks I have heard figures from, the true rate of inflation in the US is nearly 10%.  Wages are flat.  And the GDP is in an inflation adjusted decline for 3 consecutive quarters.

The dollar has been in freefall against foreign currencies for quite some time, with recent record lows against the Canadian Dollar, the Euro, or just about any other currency you can name.  And that is automatic inflation for a nation with such a massive trade imbalance.

Add in the recent moves by the Fed to pump billions of dollars in new cash into the markets to increase liquidity, and you get a further surge of inflation.

And the final hit… the Fed normally uses interest rates to help control inflation.  But if no one is borrowing, then it doe not matter what rate the Federal Reserve sets, and that rate loses its power to have an impact on inflation.

We probably will not see interest rates on investments in double digits like we did in the late 1970’s.  But all of the rest of it is already here and happening…  not yet to that degree, but increasing steadily.  And it is happening even in areas that have previously been virtually immune to previous downturns.

[frimmel]

So basically the whole thing is imploding? Collapsing under its own weight to put it another way.

Coke’s only real means of increasing business are to get those who haven’t picked a brand (kids) or convert Pepsi’s customers (the reason I assume the soft drink aisle is filled with such variety- each side competing for smaller and smaller shares of those who consume soda.)

Geico for instance all their ads encourage you to ditch your current provider.

I can’t see that as being sustainable.

[Jennifer]

You know, Switch raises an interesting point.  When the boomers retire they will be drawing down on their funds, not adding too their funds and that should result in an over all down market until their generation dies off to a point the balance of power can shift to the next generation. (I believe the World War Generation is a 4th the size of the Boomer generation and the Generation X generation is like half the size of the Boomer generation.)

I also agree with Switch that there needs to be some massive investigations into how these regulations came into being, who collected kick backs and in what amounts since 1997 (the last major shift in Mortgage Laws was passed in 1997, since then there have been many attempts to establish a new regulatory committee to reign in the major Mortgage banks that have been voted down.)  I’m talking investigations into politicians that voted against regulation, wrote the 1997 mortgage laws as well as the upper level managers (CFOs, CEOs, regional managers, etc) into their lending practices.  We need to see perp walks, lots of them, and I’m talking at all levels here.  The only ones who can’t be blamed are the local branch managers and that’s because they had no power to approve or not approve, they just punched numbers into the computer and waited for the function to spit out a response.

I disagree with Switch’s assertion that inflation is higher than reported.  It FEELS worse than it is, but I think that in a decade when we look back at this, we’ll realize it was worse than we wanted, but no where near as bad as we were told.

For instance, the price of milk at my local grocery store in 2003 was $3.19/gallon.  It is currently $3.41/gallon.  Percent wise it seems really large, but real money wise, it’s only 22 cents more, not even a quarter.

Gasoline is much worse, but this is all artificial.  Once the word gets out that America will start drilling off our shores (and thank the Lord the government has finally allowed drilling to start as of today!) and if we get ANWR going as well as drilling in Colorado, etc the people will realize that the market has shifted and speculators will drive the price back down.

Now, factor out things like milk and oil and look at the rest of the market place.  Plasma TVs are down 50% in price and sales are up significantly.  A television similar to my 46" that cost me $1500 last year is being sold for $699 and it has slightly better technology!  So are we facing massive deflation of currency?  Of course not!  It’s just one aspect of the over all economy!  But it’s not one we see every day and not one that the broadcast and printed news harps on.

I mentioned before how home prices were over priced, CC asked me if it was really so.  This is what the head of the Illinois Realtor Association said to me in an interview for the Northern Star (NIU Newspaper)

1)  Start home prices used to be worth 5 times 1/3rd the annual income of the people in that geographic area.

What does that mean?  A starter home in the NW Suburbs of Chicago, median income of $48,000 give or take, should cost $79,200 sticker price.  But what do they really cost? (2 bedroom, 1 bathroom, single family home)  The cheapest home for sale in Hoffman Estates, my hometown, is $167,900.  That’s significantly more than the $79,200 it should be selling for if the same function that Boomers had when buying a home was being used today.

2)  Family home prices used to be worth 15 times 1/3rd the annual income of the people in that geographic area.

What does that mean?  A family home (4 bedrooms, 2 bathrooms, basement, dining room, central air, half acre lot) should cost $240,000.  But what do they really cost?  (realtor.com) = $349,900.  Again, incredibly more than it should cost!

Note, I am excluding ridiculous salaries from the median salary for my region.  The CEO of Boeing should not count, nor should the Mayor of Chicago.  I’m talking ONLY working middle class salaries.  (if you include the ridiculous ones, where only one or two people in the entire region can have it, then the median income soars to over $100k per year.)

[Guest]

Some things, like electronics, are coming down in price for other factors, like changing technology, more efficient manufacturing techniques, etc.  And that has been true FOREVER in the electronics market.  It is unique due to rapid obsolescence and incredibly rapid change.

But take CORE purchases that the typical homeowner makes every day, and look at what has happened to those prices over the past couple of years.

Gasoline:  Price has tripled since 2000
Rib-Eye Steaks:  50% price increase since 2006
Little Debbie Swiss Cake Rolls up 20% since 2007
Coffee, Folgers Columbian:  Up 60% since 2006
Chicken Broth, canned:  Up 100% since 2007
Strawberries, fresh:  Up 25% since 2007
Rainier Cherries, fresh:  up 70% since 2007
Car Battery, 12v:  up 30% since 2005
Newcastle, 12 pack:  up 25% since 2007
Firestead Pinot Noir:  up 240% since 2005
Time Warner Cable TV service, standard package:  Up 17% in 1 year
Progress Energy, electricity:  up 27% since July
McDonalds non-value menu:  Up 10% this year
Applebees Pick Three Combo:  Up 20% since 2007
Coke and Pepsi:  Up 22% since 2007

One rare exception:
PSNC, natural gas:  down 17% since last year (based on their pricing that goes into effect 1 OCT)

Truth be told, based on the things that I buy, it looks more like inflation might be around 15% annual rate…  But I will trust the experts who say it is only 10% overall for all goods and services offered in the US (including food and energy which are the two things that EVERYONE has to buy almost every day).

I also am going to agree whole heartedly with Jen regarding over-priced real estate.  There are a lot of areas where real estate is WAY overpriced.  You do not need to go any further than HGTV and a few episodes of House Hunters to see what is going on in some of these markets even after the bubble burst, or a few episodes of “My house is worth what?” to see the massive declines in home values in the bubble markets (SoCal especially).

[Jennifer]

Wow, life really sucks where you live.

Other than gasoline, almost none of the others have gone up like they have for you, Switch.  Maybe I just have the worlds best market or something.

Cable Television went down, at least 33%. (I used to pay $180/month for TV/Cable/Premium Channels, now I pay $110/month for the same thing, except I don’t have Stars anymore, but I have the others)

My steak price went up, but only a few pennies.  Instead of $3.99/pound I pay $4.19/pound, obviously I am referring to ground meat, I only buy steaks for special occasions because red meat is really bad for the body.

My coffee prices went way down and I switched from self-brewed to McDonalds.

Strawberries (fresh) are stagnate for me.  Last year I payed $5/bucket, this year I paid $5/bucket.  (Bucket contains as much as you can get in it.)

Coke I still pay $3.33/case 24 (AKA 3 for $10.00) at Jewel-Osco on a routine basis.

So either I am the luckiest woman in North America, and my inflation was only a mere 4-5% including gasoline, or you are the most unluckiest man alive. (Then again, you DO live on the east coast….)

PS:  This is not saying you are wrong.  This is only comparing my reality to the reality you stated you are experiencing.  Considering I live about as far away from you as Berlin is from Moscow, it is perfectly considerable that the price ranges on foods (mine grown locally, yours perhaps imported) is accurate.  After all, Wisconsin dairy is a 90 minute drive from here.  Berry farms (including wineries and peaches and other fruits) are spitting distance from me.  I have a HUGE corn field across the street that still lets me buy corn at $0.05/ear along with a number of other fresh vegetables.

Now, that said, my fish prices have gone up.  $8/pound for Walleye up from $7/pound last year. (I’ve been tracking in Excel because I want to keep my budget in tact.)

---

---

However, I am glad that the Switchmeister, and the goddess of radiance (me) have found common ground in the ridiculousness of over priced real estate in this country.

My personal opinion on the matter is that a starter home should be affordable to anyone who can rent a luxury apartment and a family home should be affordable for any family with two children (or less) and one working adult who has a bachelor’s degree and is in his or her mid to late thirties (or older.)

By affordable, I mean that with a 7.5% APR mortgage (a full 2.5% higher than I was offered today by Bank of America) the family can afford the principle payment, the interest payment, the mortgage insurance payment, the home insurance payment, the flood insurance payment, any other insurance payments and the property tax payments without exceeding 33% of the family income.  (PS, that 33% is not a number I am just pulling out of my arse here, from what I’m told, it used to be standard that you figured what you could afford in a home by taking 33% of your POST tax paycheck (aka that is what you have after the government takes their share.))

[Guest]

LOL, it may indeed be regional…

My SEAFOOD prices are DOWN big time, thanks in large part to an influx of southeast Asia imports.  Shrimp prices are down about 20% (about a buck a pound less on 30 count shrimp).  Prices for things like Spots have fallen through the floor (down about 70% in 3 years).  Tillapia is HALF what it was 2 years ago.

Though the problem with that is that the Eastern NC economy has a huge fisheries component, and the price drop is putting a lot of folks out of business, so in a couple of years my seafood prices are going to rise dramatically due to lack of domestic supply unless there is some stability in the market soon.

[Smacktard]

@Cmdr:

Well, for one, I think the public promises need to be realized for what they are: false promises.  If they were terminated immediately, many of the budget problems would also terminate.  Perhaps the fire sale of American financial institutions would also stop.

What false promises?

However, that said, I have to say that for over a decade now I have been lamenting the fact that American realestate was way over priced.  I believe it is the unrealistic pricing of American realestate that is the culprit of the fire sale, not the deficit or any of the other factors being listed.

A decade ago, it was a buyer’s market. In 2000, I bought my house in Southern California for $86 a square foot- a steal.  Homes have always been expensive in New York, San Francisco, Monteray, Santa Barbra, etc.

In 1998, the Median Price for a San Diego home was $195,000. That’s doable on $50,000 a year (close to median income back then), with a 10% down payment. In 2003, the median price had jumped to $420,000. In 2004, it was $525,000. The bubble didn’t start until around 2001.

http://www.signonsandiego.com/sdhomes/area_homesales/pastyears-2000.php

Another method of reducing the deficit would be to retail our energy reserves.  The United States of America (and Canada) holds almost a third of the world’s coal reserves and almost 15% of the world’s oil reserves (Colorado alone has more oil than all of Saudi Arabia) and, adding Canada to the mix, that number is even higher.

If we were to cash in on the unrealistic prices of oil right now, I wager the United States could easily see a negative deficit in a matter of a few short years.

We should definitely become an oil exporting nation again. But it would mean putting a floor tax on gasoline ($3 or $4 a gallon) to create demand. Nobody wanted an electric, CNG, or fuel cell car when gas was $1.50.

As for the value of the American currency, it will remain strong.  It may not be uber right now, but it is strong.  That’s because the value of American holdings, resources and institutions back up the currency.  People know that the US Dollar is worth one US Dollar and that it will be worth one US Dollar tomorrow and the day after and the day after that for as long as one can speculate life will exist barring any serious acts of god(s).

The dollar is worth whatever investors think its worth. If America starts to look like a bad investment, investors start cashing in their dollars for other currencies or hard commodities. It’s our luck that Britain, Germany, and Japan are having their own tough times, so the dollar looks relatively good stacked up against those currencies.

I must admit that the current financial buyout packages (both passed and proposed) worry me greatly.  I, for one, would have been much happier had AIG, Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac gone out of business, liquidated their assets and let smarter men and women take control of those assets and fix the problems.

Fannie and Freddie hold over five TRILLION in mortgage securities. Letting them go under was unthinkable. They had reached TBTF status (too big to fail). But I would love to read an economist’s paper suggesting they should have gone under…

What has the solution been recently?  Give them their golden parachutes and bail the company out with public money.  What’s my idea of a solution?  Put them in bankruptcy, sell all their assets to other companies, let their stocks dry up and cinch your belt for a while until you can recover.  Why won’t it happen?  Americans are cry babies.  They gambled, they lost, now they want “Mommy and Daddy” to come bail them out.

That’s true to some extent, but another problem is a failure of the market itself to fix a price on all these bundles of mortgage securities. When the govt. approves the bailout (which they will), there’s a chance (probably small) that some of these mortgage securities are seriously UNDERvalued, and we could actually make a profit on them if housing goes up.

[cystic crypt]

So this is pretty much reflective of what i am talking about.

With inflation rising and currency value dropping, combined with decreasing property values, then America’s real GDP is dropping - particularly relative to its major trading partners (Canada, Europe, etc.).  This would work in favor of yor trade imbalance short term as it is becoming cheaper for me to buy American goods/services/properties (particularly given NAFTA), which should help to maintain or even increase production and therefore exports.

However with interest rates bound to rise to correct for inflation, decreasing credit and cash availability due to the massive banking and financial company screw-ups, increased debt (and deficit) with concurrent increasing cash outflow to pay the interest to foreign debtors, there becomes less money (and less valuable money to boot) available for capital projects, for needed imports, for new buildings, or even to support current infrastructure.

Say what you like about the lack of necessity for gov’t funded social services and health care - allowing for the aging population, aside from turning everyone into soylent green as they get older, there will be a massive crush on gov’t resources, requiring more tax dollars from a population less able to draw from.

Is this sustainable?  How will America deal with this?  Will America default on its loans?  
Supposedly if the foreign aid, and military money dries up and is poured back into realistic expenditures, there may be a way to maintain some sense of financial order, but to what avail?

[Jennifer]

I think that is a bit misleading, CC.  Real Estate does not factor into GDP.

As for the government making a profit on the land, I would have slightly less problems with the government offering a prime +2% mortgage to anyone who can muster 30% down on a home and if they want better terms (and those terms kinda suck if you have even moderately good credit) you can go to a private bank.  This way at least there is a safety net for people who screwed up when they were younger, but it’s also a halfway safe bet for the taxpayers.

ST, I’m glad you made insane profits on your home.  I did too (purchased in 2001, currently worth 125% what I paid for it.) But that does not mean it is right.  The housing market CORRECTION bringing prices back in line with reality of their actual worth, not their speculative worth, can only be a good thing for people.  As housing prices return to normal, more families will be able to afford them, more families living in owned homes mean they will slowly build up equity instead of “pissing into the wind” their income on rents.

This is especially important because of the false promises of the New Deal which, in essence, was a statement from the old government that government will be your mommy and your daddy and take care of you in your old age and this will pay you back dollars for the pennies you put into the system. (ie Social Security, Medicare, Medicaid, etc.)  Unfortunately, we are liable for them now, we promised, and the fools actually think they are collecting THEIR OWN money back, not pilfering the pockets of their grandchildren.

As these programs go into bankruptcy (latest estimate was 2042 according to Money Magazine last June, before then it was 2015 but some legislation was changed extending the time) and with Switch’s very good point about boomers (who won’t get what they thought they were going to get in Social Security) plundering their 401k plans, and other mutual funds and stocks driving the stock market down, homes will be the only form of retirement savings.

I, for one, plan to pull my assets out of the market in Jan 2013 (I need them for the end of the world party debts I’ll have when the world does not end in 2012!).  FDIC savings accounts, even at a mere 0.0005% savings return, will pay better than the market at that time and we’ll have a REAL depression on our hands. (Maybe I’ll invest in pawned gold instead….)

[Obergruppenfuhrer]

I have to agree with Cmdr Jennifer on multiple points here. Companies that gambled need to go under and their assets divided among those that haven’t. The government is bailing out too many companies here. The LAST thing we need is our taxes wasted on bailing out corporate idiots that deserve the grave they dug. That goes to back up our currency value and national debt as she mentioned.

After a couple major recessions, the government is quick to react soely out of fear when they think another one may be coming. This countries economy has an incredible ability to bounce back into the stratoshpere from the depths of hell. Being a former Senior Loan Officer, I’m all too familiar with these trends and how they affect the market. I can’t believe AIG is going under, (if I’m correct there). I’ve worked with them so many times. Fanny Mae deserves the slow death along with any other company that has relied on gambling and greed above client retention for so many years.

I don’t know how to explain this countries buoyancy. I could guess that in a nation where consumerism is SO powerful, money pours like rain and then dries up. When it rains, it pours though. I’m beginning to think we are digging a grave we cannot fully come out of. That’s my fear at least.

[Jennifer]

Ober:

I believe AIG’s bailout is already a done deal.  However, as an INSURANCE group, you would think that would be one industry that COULD go under without significant impact on the daily lives of people.  (emphasizing, not yelling.  Maybe I need to use italics in the future.)

Here’s how I see the fall out of AIG going under, if it had been allowed too:

Insurance policies are still in effect for 90 days, backed by the US Government and only to give the customers time to find replacement insurance somewhere else.

The myriad of other insurance companies quickly gobble up the lucrative insurance contracts.

Status quo is restored.

Who is harmed?  AIG executives who made bad decisions.  I believe, could be wrong, but I believe that AIG got into trouble because they invested in Mortgage Backed Equities (ie, they bought up sub-prime mortgages off other banks and mortgage brokers) because the interest rates were high (but so was the risk, which people fail to remember.)

Fannie and Freddie should have gone under decades ago, in my most humble of opinions.  There is just something fundamentally wrong with a semi-private, semi-public company (government/citizens own it.)  I just don’t see how that could work - and I seem to be supported by its failure.  I know that the Clinton and Bush administrations both attempted to put regulatory control over Fannie and Freddie (1997, 1999, 2003 and 2005 for each respective executive) and legislators blocked it each time.  So it appears that even those who would know, knew something was wrong with those companies, and knew before the housing bubble.

How should we protect people from Fannie/Freddie collapsing?

As for the government making a profit on the land, I would have slightly less problems with the government offering a prime +2% mortgage to anyone who can muster 30% down on a home and if they want better terms (and those terms kinda suck if you have even moderately good credit) you can go to a private bank.  This way at least there is a safety net for people who screwed up when they were younger, but it’s also a halfway safe bet for the taxpayers.

And let Fannie/Freddie go under.

[Obergruppenfuhrer]

@Cmdr:

I think that is a bit misleading, CC.  Real Estate does not factor into GDP.

As for the government making a profit on the land, I would have slightly less problems with the government offering a prime +2% mortgage to anyone who can muster 30% down on a home and if they want better terms (and those terms kinda suck if you have even moderately good credit) you can go to a private bank.  This way at least there is a safety net for people who screwed up when they were younger, but it’s also a halfway safe bet for the taxpayers.

ST, I’m glad you made insane profits on your home.  I did too (purchased in 2001, currently worth 125% what I paid for it.) But that does not mean it is right.  The housing market CORRECTION bringing prices back in line with reality of their actual worth, not their speculative worth, can only be a good thing for people.  As housing prices return to normal, more families will be able to afford them, more families living in owned homes mean they will slowly build up equity instead of “pissing into the wind” their income on rents.

This is especially important because of the false promises of the New Deal which, in essence, was a statement from the old government that government will be your mommy and your daddy and take care of you in your old age and this will pay you back dollars for the pennies you put into the system. (ie Social Security, Medicare, Medicaid, etc.)  Unfortunately, we are liable for them now, we promised, and the fools actually think they are collecting THEIR OWN money back, not pilfering the pockets of their grandchildren.

As these programs go into bankruptcy (latest estimate was 2042 according to Money Magazine last June, before then it was 2015 but some legislation was changed extending the time) and with Switch’s very good point about boomers (who won’t get what they thought they were going to get in Social Security) plundering their 401k plans, and other mutual funds and stocks driving the stock market down, homes will be the only form of retirement savings.

I, for one, plan to pull my assets out of the market in Jan 2013 (I need them for the end of the world party debts I’ll have when the world does not end in 2012!).  FDIC savings accounts, even at a mere 0.0005% savings return, will pay better than the market at that time and we’ll have a REAL depression on our hands. (Maybe I’ll invest in pawned gold instead….)

I could have sworn I loathed seeing your posts at one time. Not anymore. Especially after reading your quote. But I won’t even use the “P” word in this forum.

[Obergruppenfuhrer]

@Cmdr:

And let Fannie/Freddie go under.

I fought with those companies for 2 years doing mortgages. For larger mortgage companies, they were involved in some of the shadiest paper work and most hidden fees I’ve ever seen. It took our President 3 days to finally get an explanation from them for a 7000 fee they were trying to hide from a homeowner I was trying to bail out. Let their ships sink at last. They should have been done SO long ago it’s revolting.

[Imperious Leader]

The worst was countrywide. no question. Crook company. They had no shame and no problem with throwing out old ladies who were a day late or an hour late paying what could have saved their homes. And that company was run like a Jim Jones Cool-Ade stand. Thank god it went under and got its just reward.

[Jennifer]

Yea, I really dodged a bullet when I used the Soldier’s and Sailor’s Relief Act to force Countrywide to let me refinance early with Harris Bank.  (All you have to do as an enlisted soldier is prove that you could save as little as a penny or more in the deal and they are obligated to let you move!)

I don’t know.  I’m sure there are some on the boards who will hate me for this statement, but I just don’t care.  If you run a company and you make poor decisions and people chose to invest in your company anyway, then - assuming you did not LIE to them, which is a criminal offense - then perhaps when the company goes under it is justice?

Is it not the tenement of capitalism that when one company goes bankrupt, there are five companies in the wings ready to gobble up the market share no longer being serviced by that company?

For instance, let us pretend that United Airlines declared bankruptcy and was forced to liquidate their assets.  Now, this would be horrible for stock holders, but then United Airlines has been flirting with outright liquidation for decades so it is no secret it could happen at a moment’s notice.

Now, do you think all those customers would no longer be serviced?  Of course not!  Southwest Airlines, American Airlines, British Airways, Lufthansa, etc will pick up the slack, and with the increased customer base, they would probably purchase many of the planes at used prices meaning the debt owed by United to Boeing for the planes they are leasing would also be repaid.

Why cannot we use the same feature for the mortgage industry?  I would, of course, agree that families living in homes be given the option to lock in their interest rate where it is now (and the banks would agree, because 5% is still higher than foreclosing and selling the home at a 40% loss).

---

BTW, as for Countrywide, I picked up some of it’s stock cheap and took a bath when it converted to Bank of America.  So I’m not infallible in my picks.  I will mention, however, that so far I’ve profited every quarter (my gains > my losses) except when it came to that stock.

[Obergruppenfuhrer]

@Imperious:

The worst was countrywide. no question. Crook company. They had no shame and no problem with throwing out old ladies who were a day late or an hour late paying what could have saved their homes. And that company was run like a Jim Jones Cool-Ade stand. Thank god it went under and got its just reward.

Countrywide is the EXACT company I battled for 2 years doing loans and trying to help old and middle age people save their homes from foreclosure and get them out of debt. The 30/60/90 day late hits on their credit report Countrywide would do for being even a day late. They did that so they could pin them up against a wall by harming their credit. Countrywide would stall on giving us paper work they were required to provide by law, then call my clients up and use scare tactics to try and keep them in their awful situation. I literally was at war with those people for 2 years. I’m so glad I don’t do that anymore. (I’m broke) but who cares. I don’t have an ulsur. Peace of mind was something all the money I was making never gave me. People were so screwed over by that company, they’d call me at every hour on my cell, even during Christmas to see how their refinance was going. I felt so strongly for them I never took a day off from work really. I’d go to their houses at any hour with coffee to talk to them about a plan to help save their homes. It was SO stressful.

[Imperious Leader]

Yes of course that’s because Countrywide is the Anti-Christ… a modern day Bank of America robbing from the poor to steal money for its plutocratic clique interests.

AS they say in used cars: the movie… “you gotta nickle and dime them”.

One of my friends was telling me they forces the employees to maintain Pom Poms at their desk, so they can do what they call Raw Raw events, like that Hideki Tojo inspired raise your hands after they announce some drummed up propaganda about passing # 5 or whatever in the mortgage business, when the reality is they just gave crazy loans to people who cant even buy a banana, knowing it would default… they didn’t even need a social security card to buy a house. They sent people to canvass uber poor neighborhoods to find people willing to borrow money.

They used to have this company that’s is an outright fraud called Prime America It was staffed by the biggest losers imaginable and the company basically took in people as insurance salesman as long as they had two legs. I remember taking the series 6 and the room had only like 2 people each from Prudential and Metlife, and like the other 96 people were Primeamerica rejects. I eventually worked for Metlife when i was real young and it just seems they ( Prime America ) just took anybody to work for them because the flood of people leaving was greater than flowing in. Its the same thing in Countrywide. People are basically holding that job while the entire time they are looking for a real job somewhere else.