The Economic Froeclosure Crisis.

I feel it's only fair to point out that the article referenced was written by Eliot Spitzer approximately one month before his resignation as governor of New York, a resignation prompted by his involvement with prostitutes. It is an opinion piece (not news), and as such, could be viewed as being written with a political slant (and in my opinion, it was). If you would like to read some information related to this, here is a couple of places to start:

First, the Comptroller's response to Mr. Spitzer's article

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/03/05/AR2008030503016.html

Next, a Q and A from the OCC as to why it "stepped in" to prevent State offices from try to have a say in National Bank matters.

http://www.occ.gov/Consumer/2004-3dPreemptionQNAs.pdf

It seems reasonable to me that banks under Federal Jurisdiction should not be subject to additional regulation from the States where they operate, for the reasons stated in the Q and A above. And it's stated that the majority of the "predatory lending" practices have occurred within State regulated banking institutions, and most predatory lenders have avoided the National Banking System, because of it's past enforcement action, and stricter oversight.

I post this with hesitation, I don't think CR4 is the place for politics. But since it was brought up, I felt the need to respond.

Tom

I don't think it is a place for politics either. Just information.

I am did not mean any thing political by this posting. It just seemed to me that because of the high National Debt and the fact that the Interest due will take 20% of the U.S. Budget by the year 2015 that the banking take over was a planned event. I don't think the American People would stand for a banking take over by the Federal Reserve anyother way. There had to be a crisis.