Daily Archives: January 22, 2018

Hawaii State Public Funds’ Shortfall Hits $25B

Posted on by
1

“Shortfall” –  a clever term for “we’ve lost your money”

According to the Hawaii Free Press quoting the Honolulu Star Advertiser: 

“The two public funds designed to meet the future pension and health care needs of government employees and retirees are a combined $25 billion in the hole with a growing shortfall….

The deficit in the ERS pension fund rose to $12.93 billion in the fiscal year ended June 30 from $12.44 billion in the previous fiscal year, according to one of the reports. The funded ratio — what is needed to meet future obligations — improved slightly to 54.9 percent from 54.7 percent a year earlier….

Similarly, the EUTF shortfall for all employers rose to $12.15 billion in fiscal 2017 from $11.78 billion in fiscal 2015, the last year it was reported. Its funded ratio improved to 12.8 percent from 6.7 percent because the cost of health care didn’t grow as fast as had been anticipated and because employers made more contributions to pay down the unfunded liability than required. The EUTF report has been coming out every two years but will be switching to an annual format… Continue reading →

Christiana Trust/Wilmington Savings Crash and Burn on Standing and More

Posted on by
Reply

“Times they are a changin’…”

This is paper laundering (same as money laundering) trying to confuse the true ownership identity, a faulty chain of title and failures to properly & physically transfer the paperwork – and in most cases, you will find Fannie or Freddie concealed in the background calling the shots as the ultimate investor.

Plaintiffs should have to sign an affidavit that this loan was a final SALE, not a pledge, nor participation in rehypothecation and that no underlying agreements have been executed in relation to this loan and other parties at any time. It should be a federal crime to conceal the true ownership of the debt or to participate in a paper laundering scheme devised to create fraud on the court.

Fannie and Freddie have allegedly sold loans in bulk to 3rd parties (likely to get the debt off their books and create an image of healthy corporations). Where are the assignments? And what are the underlying agreements? How much of the sale that the third party recovers do the GSEs collect? Is it a case of, “here’s the loan mortgage schedule – whatever you sell Fannie gets X%” and the 3rd party pays the legal fees rather than buy the loans outright for value?

Everything else they do is crooked – why would this be any different?