Monday, February 28, 2011

Can You Live On Unemployment Insurance?

NEW YORK (MainStreet) — Being unemployed has taught Cindy, a former airline contractor from Cincinnati, an unusual lesson: If you want to save money, try freezing your milk.

“I had no idea that you could freeze milk, but it turned out to be a brilliant discovery,” said Cindy, who asked not to be identified for fear of people knowing she lost her job. “Milk is not cheap and being able to store it in the freezer has been incredibly helpful to manage my expenses.”

This revelation fundamentally changed her approach to grocery shopping and saved her valuable dollars in the process. Now, rather than buy a new carton of milk each week, Cindy, 34, has taken to buying milk in bulk, freezing it, and only taking out a carton when she actually needs it. She applies the same technique to buying loaves of bread as well.

It might sound like an extreme way to live, but to Cindy, who has been unemployed now for just over three months, “desperate times call for desperate measures.”

Cindy is just one of 15 million Americans who are now unemployed, and among the nearly 6 million recently laid off workers who started collecting jobless benefits in the third quarter of this year.

Like many of these workers, Cindy has little choice but to lean heavily on her weekly unemployment check of $330 to help pay her bills. But while she appreciates the money, it is still only about 40% of what she earned at her previous job. As a result, she must resort to all sorts of financial acrobatics to make ends meet, whether that means forfeiting eating out and replacing her cell phone with Google’s free calling service, or negotiating with her energy company to freeze her heating bill for three months so that the cost doesn’t go up beyond her means.

The difficulty that Cindy and other out-of-work individuals around the country are running up against is that unemployment benefits are rarely enough for most Americans to live on for very long.

“I am surviving on these cost cutting measures for right now, but it’s very tight getting by and I’m not sure how long it will last,” she said.

Are Unemployment Benefits Enough?

The goal of the unemployment insurance program, according to the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities, is to provide people with about half of their normal wage. However, it almost never works out this way. The average American collected $295 in weekly unemployment benefits in the third quarter of this year, according to the most recent government data. But the average weekly salary in that same quarter was $865, which means the jobless benefits replaced just over a third of the average worker’s salary.

In fact, even as Congress has successfully extended the time period one can collect jobless benefits four different times in recent years, from 26 weeks to 99 weeks, the actual amount that the average person collects relative to the wage he or she earned before becoming unemployed has slightly decreased. In 2007, before the recession began, unemployment benefits compensated 35.6% of one’s last salary. In the third quarter of this year, that number was 34.2%.

Part of the problem, according to Rebecca Dixon, a policy analyst at the National Employment Law Project, a national advocacy group for low wage workers, is that only a handful of states actually adjust the amount of benefits offered to meet annual increases in wages. In the states that do, like Pennsylvania, New Jersey and Kentucky, benefits tend to be significantly higher and come closer to meeting the standard of living that workers might have grown accustomed to. New Jersey, for example, offers maximum jobless benefits of $598 a week, nearly the twice the national average.

But whether you’re living on half of your normal salary or a third of it, getting by on these benefits alone is nearly impossible.

“The benefits definitely aren’t adequate,” Dixon said. “If your benefits are replacing 40%-50% of what you used to make, or less, there are a lot of bills you won’t be able to downsize quickly enough.”

Indeed, some might argue that’s the point. If you give the unemployed too much money for too long, it could theoretically take away their incentive to search for work. Instead, unemployment benefits are essentially intended to provide just enough money to keep jobless Americans – and the economy as a whole – temporarily afloat.

But as the term “temporary” has come to mean 99 weeks or longer, many Americans have had to find ways to get by, whether by cutting corners or occasionally supplementing their benefits whenever possible by taking little odd jobs.

Tricks To Get By on Unemployment Benefits

When Janet Raiffa lost her job as a director of recruiting at a New York City law firm back in 2008, her salary dropped from more than $200,000 a year to the roughly $20,000 she was eligible to collect during her first year on unemployment benefits. Though Raiffa did have money in savings, her lifestyle quickly started to bleed her bank account dry.

“My mortgage and maintenance are more than $3,000 a month, not counting all the other necessities,” Raiffa said.

This led Raiffa to make several immediate changes: She cancelled her gym membership and stopped eating out, which is to some New York City residents a way of life. She was also forced to dip into her nest egg to improve her cash flow, including cashing in her 401k and selling off her stocks.

But Raiffa has found some creative ways to supplement her unemployment benefits since then, for example by renting out her room from time to time through Airbnb, selling some of her wardrobe and pawning off memorabilia that had belonged to her father, including a set of Canadian coins from the 1976 Olympics.

She also jumped at random small jobs, ranging from being an extra on shows like Law & Order to writing a column for the 405 club, a popular website devoted to the unemployed. Today, Raiffa is essentially a full time freelancer – a “permalancer” – who no longer relies on unemployment payments at all.

Nicholas Carroll, who had previously worked in the world of e-commerce, followed the same path and took a number of odd jobs while unemployed, including trimming trees for $18 an hour. But even with these odd jobs, Carroll still had to change his lifestyle, particularly in terms of the food he ate. Rather than eat out with friends, he would suggest a pot luck dinner instead, where everyone prepares a dish.

“The pot luck food was nearly as good, a quarter the price, and the parties are a lot more fun,” Carroll said.

Along the same lines, Marc Levy, one of our Voices of MainStreet, notes that there are coffee shops that offer day old bread and bagels for next to nothing, an option that can prove essential for someone on a tight budget.

For many others though, the lifestyle changes brought on by unemployment have been more severe. According to Dixon, the policy analyst at NELP, plenty of unemployed Americans have little choice but to rely on food assistance and welfare programs to supplement their benefits. Indeed, the number of Americans who currently rely on food stamps has skyrocketed as the unemployment level remains near 10%.

Likewise, Raiffa notes that while most unemployed people may start cutting costs by canceling their cable and gym memberships, she knows some who have cancelled health insurance plans as well, and others who have no choice but to move in with family and friends to save on rent.

“I think we’re all grateful for the unemployment benefits we have,” Raiffa said. “But it’s nowhere near enough.”

Comment:

I realise that things get very tight when you're on unemployment insurance. But the point is, Americans are wasteful, extravagent, and over-indulgent. That's how we're conditioned to be. You see it in ads all the time: "Don't Wait - Get It Now!", "You Know You Want It", "You Work Hard - You Deserve It", "If You Buy This, Everyone Will Know How Super Cool You Are", and other BS crap.

It's the government's and Judeo-Capitalists way of keeping us in debt so they can profit, and we'll be too concerned with paying our bills to make any trouble.

If you learn to live within your means, you can avoid debt slavery, and still have something nice every now and again. Just don't be greedy, and if you can't pay cash, then you probably shouldn't buy it. Credit is for emergencies, not luxuries. Too many luxuries leads to debt slavery.

Sunday, February 27, 2011

Unemployment Continues To Rise

NEW YORK (MainStreet) — Unemployment rates increased in the majority of states throughout 2010, according to new data from the Bureau of Labor Statistics, in a further sign that the economic recovery has yet to reach the job market.

In the country’s first full year out of the recession, 31 states saw their average annual unemployment rate increase compared to 2009, while just 18 experienced year-over-year improvements and one state remained unchanged. On the whole, the unemployment rate for the U.S. was 9.6%, up from 9.3% the year before.
Related Articles

“The unemployment rate is certainly still high, but it often keeps going up after a recession ends,” said Ken LeVasseur, senior economist at the Bureau of Labor Statistics. “We saw big year-over-year increases in unemployment in 2008 and in 2009. By comparison, the increase this year was relatively modest.”

Several of the states that experienced the biggest annual increases in unemployment were the same ones that had already been particularly battered during the recession years. Florida and California, which both had double digit unemployment throughout 2009, saw their unemployment rates continue to rise by more than 1 percentage point in 2010, and Nevada saw its unemployment go up by more than 2 percentage points, averaging 14.9% on the year.

As LaVasseur notes, these three states also helped to drive down their surrounding regions, as the Mountain and Pacific regions experienced the steepest increases in unemployment for the year, with the South Atlantic region around Florida not far behind. Indeed, this coincides with previous reports speculating that the Sun Belt regions – the South and Southwest – would experience more long lasting hardships from the economic downturn, as these areas were particularly vulnerable to the housing market.

For some states though, the numbers in this report may be a bit deceptive.

“The downside of looking at unemployment rates over the course of the full calendar year is that it masks some of the improvements we’ve seen. When you look at the full year, the rates are higher, but a number of states are showing improvement in the monthly data,” LeVasseur said.

By the end of the year, for example, the unemployment rate in Nevada tapered off around 14.5%, about half a percentage point below their annual average. Many other states may have experienced a similar improvement in their job markets as 2010 came to a close, but their overall annual averages were still weighed down by a tough first half of the year.

The states whose job markets fared the best last year were mainly in the New England area and in the Midwest. Vermont’s unemployment rate dropped by .7 percentage points while Michigan and Minnesota both had a .8 percentage point decrease, tying for the most of any state. The change in Michigan’s unemployment rate is particularly notable as this was one of the hardest hit states during the recession due to the collapse of the auto industry, but both the state and the industry have begun to rebound in recent months.

The job market in the Midwest, on the whole, was largely insulated from the worst of the recession, in part because this region was the least invested in the housing boom, and therefore less susceptible to the collapse of the housing industry. Likewise, LeVasseur explains that the housing market in New England was also not quite as volatile as elsewhere in the country.

“Unlike the Sun Belt areas, the housing market in New England was already fully built up [before the recession], so when the bubble burst, it didn’t have much of an impact,” he said. “Also, it’s an area that lost some of its manufacturing base in earlier recessions, so the region didn’t have that much in the way of durable goods manufacturing to lose.”

As for the rest of the country, LeVasseur suggests there is good reason to be cautiously optimistic going forward.

“The labor market as it stands today is a little bit better than the 2010 annual average,” he said. “If all of the states stay where they are right now for the rest of this year, the annual unemployment will go down for 2011.”

Comment:

They've been saying the unemployment rate will be going down soon for years. Not only hasn't it, but I predict it will continue to rise.

The Jew media only tells us what they want us to know, and they often tell us what they think we want to hear, whether it's true or not.

What's really disturbing is that the majority of the sheeple believe this tripe. When people are desparate, they'll grab at the flimsiest of hopes. Hey, that's how Obama got elected!

As National Socialists, it's up to us to teach people to see through the government's lies. If we can accomplish this, then more of them will be willing to stand up to ZOG and demand change. If we do our jobs correctly, the change the White Working class will demand is National Socialism.

That's why we must redouble our efforts, and never give up.

"Never, ever, ever give up." - Winston Churchill.

Saturday, February 26, 2011

After 9/11, U.S. Gave Even More Student Visas To Saudis

By Garrett Haake and Robert Windrem
NBC News

Khalid Ali-M Aldawsari, the Saudi student arrested Thursday on charges that he planned to build bombs for terror attacks inside the United States, was granted a U.S. student visa after qualifying for a generous scholarship sponsored by Saudi Arabia’s King Abdullah, according to the indictment against him.

Aldawsari was one of more than 10,000 Saudi students granted student visas in 2008, an NBC News analysis of the visa program shows.

Indeed, the number of Saudi students approved for entry into the United States has jumped more than fourfold since 15 young Saudis helped carry out the attacks on the United States on Sept. 11, 2001. At the same time, visas granted to other Middle East nations dropped often precipitously or remained at the same level.

The analysis shows that 26,744 Saudi students received US F-1 and F-2 visas in 2010, up from 6,836 in 2001. The numbers have steadily increased as the Kingdom has provided financing for students, believing the students' exposure to the U.S. and its education system would help US-Saudi relations.

While overall non-immigrant visas from Saudi has dropped during the period from 2001 to 2010, the education visas have skyrocketed, in large part, say U.S.officials, because of the King Abdullah Scholarship program which sponsored Aldawsari.

Aldawsari is the only recipient of the scholarship known to have been accused of terrorism.

The King Abdullah Program annually sponsors thousands of Saudi students. It generously "provides the means to best world universities to pursue studies that lead to degrees (bachelors, masters and doctorate) and medical fellowships."

Administered through the Ministry of Higher Education, it is one of the most generous programs anywhere. According to the program's website, King Abdullah Scholarships provide financial support for scholarship recipients. Among the privileges it offers are the following:

* Monthly stipend
* Full tuition and fees paid directly to the educational institution
* Cost of attending conferences, symposia and workshops
* Expenses for scientific trips
* Allowances for books and clothes
* Financial support for spouse and dependents
* Medical insurance

Aldawsari referred to the program as the "Traitor of the Two Holy Places Scholarship," a play on the Saudi king's most revered title, "Protector of the Two Holy Places." The FBI says he chose the program because, unlike other Saudi scholarships, it would allow him to go directly to the U.S. without having to first study in college-level programs in Saudi Arabia.

A review of State Department records show that Saudi students got far more visas than others from the region. Students from the United Arab Emirates, for example, received a total of 1,233 student visas in 2010, compared with 1,246 in 2001. Yemeni students received 279 visas in 2010, compared with 376.

Pakistani students had the most precipitous drop, declining from 3,880 in 2001 to 1,093 visas in 2010, a drop of 72 percent. Pakistani officials complain that the drop has dramatically hurt U.S.-Pakistani relations, because those seeking visas are the children of the most affluent and pro-U.S. Pakistanis.

Comment:

If just one terrorist gets into the country this way (and he did), it's one too many. Insane, isn't it? They destroy a chunk of this country, yet we're still letting them in. Not only shouldn't we be letting them in, but those that are already here should be expelled as enemies of the state.

It makes me wonder if in addition to his scholarship fund for his people, if King Abdullah doesn't have a secret "scholarship" fund for American officials, if you get my meaning. I'm sure he does.

Unfortunately, America is pathetically protected by the same officials who make the rules, and accept payola for making exceptions to those rules. A few bucks here (a few bucks by the standards of the wealthy, that is), a phone tap there, and anything you want is yours - if you have the money and influence.

Now I'm not saying there were no corrupt officials in National Socialist Germany. There were indeed a few. But most of these traitors were exposed and dealt with in the most severe manner (involving a cigarette and a blindfold).

Comrades, this is one of the reasons this country is dying. Perhaps it deserves to die. But in it's place we can build a better country. One where the welfare of the White Working Class comes first. As discouraging as it can be at times, we must keep going and never give up hope.

NOTE- I cannot and will not be more specific as to the time and location of our California event on this blog, nor will I mention it again until AFTER it's over. If any out-of-state Party comrade is going to be in Central California during April and would like to attend, contact me by email or snail mail. Check the sidebar on the right in the "About Me" section for my addresses. If you make a firm commitment to attend, I will send you the details.

Friday, February 25, 2011

Seeing Makes For A Better Understanding





Yesterday's post was in regard to the GAO's report that how the majority of the Southwest border is unsecured. There's a lot of talk and description about how desolate and isolated the region is, but hearing about it and seeing it are two different things.

I know that some of you have never been to California, or the Southwest in general. I'm sure you've seen pictures in magazines or on TV, but they show you exactly what they want you to see, they way they want you to see it.

The accompanying photos were taken by me on my cross-country drive last July on the way home from Tennessee. They were taken in Arizona and are typical of the kind of terrain our Border Patrol agents have to contend with. While spectacular and beautiful, it is isolated and inhospitable where the temperature can get up into the 120's in the day time during the summer, and below freezing at night in the winter.

As you can see, it is real easy for thousands of illegals to pass through this desert virtually undetected. I know it sounds a little melodramatic, but it's true. People go in there, and never come out - alive at least. A few are never even found.

Back in the 1980's, there was a true story of a woman who made a wrong turn down a dirt road in desert terrain like this. When she realised her mistake, she tried to make a U-turn, and got stuck in the sand. She decided to walk the three miles back to the highway. She wasn't wearing a hat, sunblock and had no water. She didn't even make it halfway before she collapsed from the heat. She was dead of exposure when they found her the next day.

It's because of this situation, and others typical of the desert, that the need for troops on the border becomes quite clear. Unless we secure our borders NOW, the future of our Folk in this country is bleak. We will be a minority in thirty years, and by the end of this century, we will be virtually gone.

Thursday, February 24, 2011

New GAO Report Says Less Than Half of Southwest Border is Secure

Thursday, February 17, 2011, 11:08 AM EST - posted on NumbersUSA

A new study from the Government Accountability Office finds that less than half of the 2,000-mile border with Mexico is "operationally controlled" by the Border Patrol. The study says the Southwest border with Mexico "is vulnerable to cross-border illegal activity."

The study evaluated the Border Patrol's ability to detect and respond to cross-border illegal activity and detect and respond to illegal activity at the border or after entry into the United States.

According to the study, the Department of Homeland Security has varying levels of "operational control" for 873 miles of the 2,000-mile border. The study did note that "operational control" has increased an average of 126 miles per year since 2005.

The border is divided into nine sectors, including the Yuma Sector, which reports near 100% "operational control." However, the other eight sectors report somewhere between 11-86% "operational control."

GAO conducted the study in cooperation with the House Committee on Homeland Security. GAO analyzed DHS border security documents and data supporting border security measures reported by DHS for fiscal years 2005 through 2010, and interviewed DHS officials.

Comment:

When I first started teaching, I had several student loans to repay. As a consequence, I couldn't afford to go all summer without earning any money, so I took jobs as a truck driver. I drove through these areas often. They can be very desolate and lonely. It's very easy to slip into this country in these regions, despite the fact that they are among the most inhospitable, climate-wise (ever experienced 125 degree heat - I have).

We need at least five times as many people patrolling there. Where could we get them? Easy. BRING OUR TROOPS HOME AND DEPLOY THEM ALONG THE BORDER!

It's such an easy solution. The only possible reason why it isn't done is because ZOG doesn't want to. God forbid the Judeo-Capitalists should lose their slave-labour force.

If this country were National Socialist, we'd have plenty of people, probably SS securing our borders against these invaders. Every day, the need for NS in this country becomes more and more a necessity if the White Working class is to survive.

Dan 88!

Wednesday, February 23, 2011

Updates And Reminders

Time for some bi-monthly updates and reminders.

1. I just got a response from Google in regard to the appeal I filed after they suspended my AdSense account. I'm sure no one will be surprised to learn that my appeal was denied. Alright, it's time to move on. There are other opportunities on the internet, and I've already been doing some research.

2. The date, time, and location have been set for our first California event. I'll release whatever details on this blog I feel are appropriate, when I am authorised to do so. All I can say for now is it will be before our Laurens conference, and it will NOT be in San Bernardino. I wouldn't do that to my comrades unless I had no other choice! LOL Any out-of-state comrades who will be in the area and would like to attend, please notify me by April 2 by email or snail mail. Both addresses can be found in the sidebar on the right in the "About Me" section. Thank you.

3. Today is February 23. I sincerely hope everyone has sent in their pledges for this month by now. If you haven't, let's get on it comrades. Bills must be paid on time whether you send in your pledges on time or not.

4. Let's not forget about turning in our monthly reports. I must confess, I myself forgot, but I managed to get it in before the end of the month. If you haven't sent them in yet, let's get it done comrades.

5. I'm getting DSL on Friday! Finally, no more dial-up that takes so long, that by the time a website comes up, I need a shave!

6. I'm still a member of Amazon.com associates. You can use that to help support the ANP. I can post ANYTHING that Amazon.com sells on this blog. If you are looking to buy something on Amazon that is NOT advertised here, let me know what it is. I can post the ad here. If I do, and you buy it through my link, the ANP will get the commission, and it won't cost you any extra. Just let me know what you want by email, and I'll have the link up within a day. If you don't want to do it by email, just post it in the comments section of the most recent post. Thanks.

BTW, asking you to request I post specific ads so you can buy through me is in no way illegal or against Amazon policies. If you buy from them, they don't care which link you use to get to them, just as long as you get there and buy!

Tuesday, February 22, 2011

Traffic Tickets: Another Government Scam

How many of you have ever received a traffic ticket? Most of you I'm sure. Let's be honest. I'm sure most of you were guilty - at least on a technicality. But were you treated fairly? No way! If you bothered to go to court to contest it, what happened? You basically told your story about how you are innocent. Then the cop told his story about how you're guilty. Usually without even taking time to think about it, the judge bangs his gavel and finds you guilty. Then he fines you. End of story.

You ask yourself, "Whatever happened to innocent until proven guilty? That cop had no evidence, just his word against mine."

Technically, the concept of innocent until proven guilty was followed. However, in traffic court, like in civil court, it's not innocent until proven guilty beyond a reasonable doubt like with felonies and misdemeanors. It's by the preponderance of evidence. With felonies, they have to prove you 100% or near 100% guilty. With preponderance of evidence, it's only 51% guilty to convict you. Testimony is evidence. The judge decides who to believe by asking himself, "Who has a reason to lie to me?" Is it the cop? Theoretically, no, because it shouldn't mean anything to him personally whether you're convicted or not. But you do have a reason to lie. You don't want to pay a fine and have your insurance premiums raised as well, or waste a perfectly good Saturday sitting in some stupid traffic school. So the judge will almost always believe the cop. Your only hope is to get off on some technicality. Easier said than done unless you're an attorney, right? Not any longer!

Sunday evening, I heard a story on Fox News about a website that helps people find legal ways of beating traffic tickets. It's www.helpigotaticket.com I went there, and it's just chock full of useful information and techniques we can use to beat this crooked system whose true purpose is wring more money out of the people to help fill the state's sagging treasury.

It's tells you how to file a motion with the judge in writing, how to request a trial by declaration, motion to dismiss, change a venue, and many other things. It also has downloadable forms for these things, and explains how to fill them out and who and where to send them.

If you use this website properly, you'll be able to beat most any ticket you receive.

Now I should tell you that this site was designed to help Californians, and the laws talked about there are from the California Vehicle Code, but using internet resources, you can find the equivalent vehicle codes in any state, so it should work for everybody. It just means a little extra effort for non-Californians.

Let me ask you this. Are you going to say, "This is too much trouble. I don't have the time to be bothered."? If that's they way you feel, then just bend over and take it from the state. In other words, just pay the fine, no matter how outrageously high it is and don't complain. In California, just five miles an hour over the speed limit can range from $300 - $500 dollars depending on the jurisdiction in which you are cited, and any previous tickets on your record. Don't forget your insurance rates may skyrocket - especially if you already have one or more tickets on your record.

As to you truck drivers, if you're an owner-operator, you know how much insurance is with a clean record. Do you need increased premiums to eat away at what little profit you retain? As to company drivers, you know that two or three tickets on your record may get you fired. Anyone else who needs his vehicle to make a living will find this site extremely useful such as myself. As a part time maintenance man and part time handyman, I need my pickup for my job. If I can't drive, I can't work. Besides, it's a matter of principle. The traffic courts couldn't care less about justice. It's all about generating revenue for the state.

Well, I'm not willingly going to contribute any more than I have to. This site gives me the resources I need to have a reasonable chance to beat them at their own game. I strongly suggest that you all pay this site a visit. www.helpigotaticket.com

BTW, I am in no way connected to this site, and I profit in no way by directing people there. I'm just trying to help my comrades find any little way they can to fight this rotten system that is designed to take as much of our hard earned money as it can.

Monday, February 21, 2011

Rep. Bob Goodlatte Introduces the SAFE Act to End the Visa Lottery

Friday, February 18, 2011, 6:32 PM EST - posted on NumbersUSA

Rep. Bob Goodlatte (R-Va.) reintroduced his SAFE for America Act (H.R.704) this week, which would in effect shut down the Visa Lottery. The lottery issues 50,000 green cards per year without any regard to their humanitarian needs, what they might offer the country or their having any family connections here.

Rep. Goodlatte had planned to introduce an amendment to H.R.1, the Continuing Resolution to fund the federal government for the remainder of FY2011, that would have prevented funding from the bill going towards the administration of the lottery. After several days of floor debate, however, Rep. Goodlatte was not allowed to introduce his amendment.
H.R.704 was introduced with 12 original co-sponsors.

Total 13 Sponsors

(CA) Bilbray
(CA) Gallegly
(CA) Sherman
(CO) Coffman
(FL) West
(IA) King
(NC) Myrick
(OR) DeFazio
(TX) Conaway
(TX) Marchant
(TX) Smith
(VA) Goodlatte
(VA) Wolf

Comment:

Why did this happen? The best reason for our government. Money. I'm not certain of this, but I imagine there is probably a substantial fee to enter this "lottery", and the government doesn't want to give up on this lucrative little scam they have going. As always, cash is king.

Sunday, February 20, 2011

Right ways to hide from creditor


Can't pay back what you owe? It's important to know what steps you can take legally to protect yourself and what steps could get you into deeper trouble.

Life hasn't turned out the way you'd planned.

You certainly had intended to pay back the money you borrowed, but now you can't. What you may not realize is that your creditors have plenty of ways of getting whatever cash or assets you have left, with or without your permission.

You don't have to make it easy for them. Whether you're contemplating bankruptcy or just need a little breathing room while you get back on your feet, you can take steps legally to protect what 'you have left -- as long as you know how.

What to do if a debt collector calls

Before we start, let's lay down some important "don'ts," such as:

* Don't use your credit cards or lines of credit. As soon as you realize you're going to have trouble paying what you owe, stop borrowing. Any further use of your credit may constitute fraud. Not only is that wrong, but it could get your bankruptcy case thrown out of court if you ultimately decide to file.

* Don't transfer your money or belongings to others. Same deal: Trying to sneak your assets into other friendly hands can be considered "fraudulent conveyance." Even paying your mom back ahead of your other creditors can cause problems. Get good legal counsel -- more on that in a minute -- before you pay any creditors or move any assets, once you know can't pay everyone. And whatever you do, don't try to hide money by buying stuff like a car, real estate or jewelry. Anything purchased shortly before bankruptcy can be put up for creditor grabs or can get your case thrown out.

* Don't tap your retirement funds. The money in your workplace retirement funds has unlimited protection from creditors, while individual retirement accounts are protected up to $1 million. Breaking into these piggy banks is foolish on a number of levels. You incur hefty taxes and penalties when you tap your retirement funds prematurely because -- no surprise -- the government wants you to leave that money alone. If your financial problems are big, you're unlikely to solve them this way, so you're essentially throwing good money after bad. Also, draining retirement funds when you're young is a good way to wind up impoverished when you're old. Don't do it.

* Don't go it alone. Even if you're sure you can ride out your current problems, you don't know what you don't know. State laws vary widely when it comes to how much power creditors have and how miserable they can make your life. So scrape up a few bucks to consult an experienced bankruptcy attorney so you understand what's at stake and what your options are. Get referrals from the National Association of Consumer Bankruptcy Attorneys. Many of these attorneys offer discounted or even free initial sessions.

With all that said, here's what you need to do:

* Take action on your bank accounts. If you have checking or savings accounts at a bank that has also issued you a credit card, line of credit or other loan, the lender can seize money in those accounts once it realizes you can't pay. Move the money to a bank or credit union where you don't owe anything. If you don't owe the bank, you still need to take action by canceling any automatic-payment arrangements you have with other creditors. If the creditor ignores your request and processes a debit after you cancel the automatic payments, you may need to close the account and move your money elsewhere. If you get Social Security income, including retirement, disability and survivor benefits, that money is exempt and cannot be seized by creditors. New rules that went into effect last year require banks to protect a sum equal to the amount of federal benefits directly deposited into your account within the previous 60 days.

* Keep contributing to your retirement accounts. Suddenly dumping a bunch of money into a new IRA could cause problems if you file for bankruptcy later, but there's no reason to halt your regular contributions if you can continue to make them. Remember, this money is protected by law from creditors.

* Stay in touch with your creditors. Hiding your assets doesn't mean hiding yourself. Refusing to talk to your creditors may encourage them to take other steps to get your attention, such as filing a lawsuit that could result in a lien against your bank accounts or garnisheeing your wages, said Gerri Detweiler, a personal-finance expert for Credit.com. You don't want to say much -- just that you can't pay right now -- because offering other details can get you embroiled in discussions you don't want to have. One way to stay in touch while still controlling the interaction is to drop your current phone line and get two prepaid phones, one for friends and family and the other for dealing with creditors, advised Steve Rhode, a former creditor counselor who runs GetOutOfDebt.org.

* Get your stuff out of your car. If you're even one day late, you're in default on your car loan, and your ride can be repossessed. Lots of lenders are moving faster on repos these days, sometimes authorizing them in as few as 10 days after your missed payment, said Philip Reed, a senior consumer-advice editor for Edmunds.com. You can try hiding your car in a friend's garage or miles away from where you live, but chances are if you use the car, the repo man can find you. What you don't want to happen is to lose the car and also the tools you need for your job or that nice aftermarket sound system (put the original back, so there aren't gaping holes in the dash the lender can charge you for).

* Adjust your withholding. It's not smart to give the government a tax-free loan of your money, but it's especially not smart to build up a big tax refund if you owe Uncle Sam. Run-of-the-mill creditors can't nab your refund, but the Internal Revenue Service can if you owe back taxes. Your refund also can be seized for unpaid child support, student loans or any other government debt.

* Run, don't walk, to your attorney if you get sued. Legal action means you need legal protection. Don't ignore the lawsuit or assume it won't help to fight back. If you don't show up in court, your creditors could tack on unfair fees or ridiculous interest to what you already owe. And it's not uncommon for collectors to sue over debts that are legally too old: Once the debts are beyond your state's statute of limitations, which ranges from three to 15 years, creditors aren't supposed to be able to bring lawsuits against you, but you have to show up in court to point that out.

Liz Weston is the Web's most-read personal-finance writer. She is the author of several books, most recently "The 10 Commandments of Money: Survive and Thrive in the New Economy." Weston's award-winning columns appear every Monday and Thursday, exclusively on MSN Money. Click here to find Weston's most recent articles and blog posts.

Comment:

Remember, we have been brainwashed to cringe at the idea of bankruptcy. Bankruptcy is NOT cheating your creditors. Do you think they'd hesitate to declare bankruptcy if it would benefit them? You better believe they wouldn't! Bankruptcy is your right. Don't be afraid to use it. Just don't make the mistake of getting snared in the credit trap again. Credit cards = Slavery.

Saturday, February 19, 2011

With new bank rules, guess who pays?

Regulations limit certain fees that banks can charge, and they are responding by coming up with new ways to ding customers. Meanwhile, their CEOs keep raking in the green.

By MainStreet
MainStreet on MSN Money

Banks waste your money, not theirs.

The past couple of years have been tough on banks -- or at least that's what they would have us believe.

Recent financial regulations are expected to cost banks as much as $25 billion a year, as they will now be forced to set limits on credit interchange fees charged to merchants, ask permission from consumers to charge overdraft fees and generally be more straightforward with their customers about interest rates.

"Regulatory and legislative activities have been working primarily against banks," said Richard Davis, the CEO of U.S. Bank, in a recent interview. "A lot of those are negatively biased against banks as they relate to profitability."

In response, major banks are expected to make up for lost revenue by coming up with new fees to charge consumers. In fact, some of the biggest banks have already begun to do so. Yet from a consumer's perspective, there is something amiss with this strategy. Many of these banks justify the new fees by playing up their weakened balance sheets, only to dole out lavish bonuses and exorbitant salaries to their executives. But if a company can afford to pay its executives extremely well, isn't that a sign that its finances are in better shape than it lets on?

JPMorgan and other banks have said they raised certain fees to make up for revenue lost because of new and proposed regulations related to debit and credit cards. CardHub.com estimates that proposed limits to debit-card transaction fees could cost banks $13 billion a year. Based on these regulatory and industry shifts, Wells Fargo said it considers its accounts and services fairly priced.

MainStreet took a closer look at some of the biggest banks that are imposing new fees this year and found that some have also increased the salaries for their chief executives, casting further doubts on their motives. How much more are they making -- and how much more are you paying?

Comment:

Remember what I've always said. No matter how friendly they seem, bankers are NOT your friends. The only thing they care about is getting as much of your money as they can. From your local little community bank, right on up to the biggest gang of criminals around, the Federal Reserve Bank, they are out to profit while you lose.

Oh, one last little annoyance. Besides taking your hard earned money, they get every little half-assed holiday off WITH pay, while most of us have to work. Who pays for their paid holidays? That's right, we do. I guess that's why we have to work on Columbus Day, so we can afford for them to have the day off with pay.

Dan 88!

Friday, February 18, 2011

WTF?!

WTF?!

Well, as you can see, the ads are gone. When I checked my email this morning, there was one from AdSense. It seems they feel that we've been clicking ads for the sole purpose of making money. The thing is, they have produced no evidence of this. My IP address has been recorded, so they know I'm not clicking my own ads. I'm very suspicious.

Remember two days ago I reported some unsually high amounts of traffic here, but no extra clicks? It was three times normal. Here's my thoughts now. Someone, I can't be sure who, notified the advertisers that their ads were being displayed on a Nazi blog. Everyone who was notified went and checked to see if their ads were here. Most of them lodged complaints with Google the next day. It took Google a day to process the complaints, and the day after that (today) my account is suspended. Do I have proof? No, but the timing is right.

Now who would do something like this? It would have to be someone with the resources to notify hundreds of advertisers in a day. It would also have to be someone with a motive to want us stopped. I can think of several organisations. I'm not going to say who because I have no proof. I wouldn't want to be sued for libel. All I'll say is I believe it to be an ANTIFA group.

The question is, can I do anything about it? Google did tell me I have the right to appeal their decision. I'm not holding my breath, but I figure I shouldn't just take this lying down. I'm a fighter, and I'm going to fight - at least one round for sure. My next action after that will depend on how the appeal goes, and what they say. I'm going to demand to see their evidence. If they produce none, I'll even consider a lawsuit, unless the ANP advises me to drop the whole thing, which I will of course.

I also heard of another company that does the same sort of thing as Google. If I can get on their program, we must be more careful. Don't come here and click ten ads at once. It looks suspicious. I have three blogs. Go to all three and click two or three ads per blog. Don't tell me it's too much trouble. I won't accept that. You DO have the time if you MAKE the time. It would only take ten or fifteen minutes. If you can't spare that, then we might as well throw in the towel right now and consign our children to the multiculturalists and financial slavery at the hands of the Judeo-Capitalists.

Comrades, I'm doing all I can. I can't do it alone. If the ANP can't count on you, then it's already over for us.

Dan 88!

Thursday, February 17, 2011

H.R. 629 Would Stop Chain Migration

Friends this bill would do more than any other single action to reduce overall legal and illegal immigration numbers.

That is a big claim. (I will come back to you at another time on why stopping legal Chain Migration would also stop a lot of illegal immigration.) But I will tell you that this bill is NumbersUSA's No. 1 legislative goal. And it has been No. 1 with us since we formed in 1996.

NEARLY QUARTER MILLION FEWER FOREIGN WORK VISAS A YEAR

With the simple passage of this bill -- and at no expense to the federal government -- H.R. 692 would reduce the number of permanent work visas for foreign citizens by nearly a quarter million a year!

H.R. 692 would eliminate family chain categories that have been engorging the U.S. labor force with unneeded workers. These permanent work permits are handed to these relatives
without any regard to their skills
without any regard to their education
without any regard to their own humanitarian claims
without any regard to whether there is a job for them.

The Chain Migration categories are among the worst examples of an immigration system that is on auto pilot and floods the country with new workers, new users of infrastructure and new users of public services without any regard to their effect on the American people.

Under H.R. 692, recent immigrants no longer would be able to bring additional immigrants into the country
because they are:

brothers and sisters
adult children
parents

The only immigration that immigrants would be allowed to control in the future would be to bring in their spouse and minor children -- the traditional nuclear family.

There is nothing intrinsically wrong about an immigrant being able to bring siblings, parents or adult children into the country. But the numbers add up to an effect that is a profound disservice to the American taxpayer, to the American worker and to the American citizen.

FAMILY IMMIGRATION SHOULD BE LIMITED TO NUCLEAR FAMILY

H.R. 692 is named the Nuclear Family Priority Act.

Once again, it has been introduced by Rep. Phil Gingrey (R-Ga.).

This bill conforms with what polls show most American think immigration policy should do in terms of families. That is, most Americans don't think an immigrant should demand to bring his/her entire extended family once he/she has been granted the incredible opportunity to be an immigrant.

Immigrants allowed into the U.S. can visit their extended family by air travel once a year (just like many Americans do with relatives that live in other states) or more. They can communicate with their extended family daily by phone and hourly by internet and other social media. Their extended family can come to the U.S. to visit them.

But immigrants should NOT feel entitled to put large extended families on waiting lists to get permanent U.S. work permits.

BILL IS HUMANE FOR TREATMENT OF PARENTS

Until 1959, immigrants weren't allowed to send for parents, adult children or siblings.

But Rep. Gingrey's H.R. 692 provides a major humane offer to immigrants who want to care for their aging parents over extended periods.

H.R. 692 allows immigrants to bring their parents to the U.S. on VISITOR visas that can last as long as 5 years, and can be renewed.

But unlike current conditions, H.R. 692 imposes these conditions on parents:

Parents are not immigrants and cannot become U.S. citizens

Parents wouldn't be able to petition for other relatives to immigrate

Parents wouldn't be allowed to use taxpayer-supported public services

Parents' health care would have to be fully provided by their naturalized U.S. citizen children

Parents wouldn't be allowed to hold a U.S. job.

Violation of the restrictions would result in parents being sent home.

But the bottom line would be nearly a quarter million fewer new immigrants each year to be competing for jobs and competing for public services and demanding more physical infrastructure and requiring vast new amounts of natural habitat to provide for their residence, work, recreation, etc.

Comment: 

Another step in the right direction, however, I don't feel it goes far enough.  For one thing, immigration has gotten so out of control in the past 20 years, that we need time for things to become rebalanced.  I'd like to see ALL immigration stopped for ten years.  I'll settle for five, but I'd prefer ten.  Once things are under control again, then we can talk about limited immigration under certain circumstances.  But the main thing is to stop the flow of immigrants from Turd World Countries, or else we'll all be sucked into an immigration blackhole and become a permanent Third World Country ourselves.  In many ways, we already have.  But it's still not too late.  There is one way back:  National Socialism.  It worked once, it can work again.  But we'll all have to work our asses off to see it come to pass.  It won't happen without us.

Dan Schruender  88! 

Wednesday, February 16, 2011

Something Funny Is Going On...

I monitor my blog at least three times a day.  Once before work, once after work, and once when I make my daily post.  Normally, I get between 50 - 75 hits a day.  Occasionally, I hit 100, but usually not much more than that.  So far today, I have received nearly 300 hits.  More than three times normal.  That's about what it was when I was running for school board.  But nothing much is going on in my life right now.  It's very much business as usual.

Also, the AdSense clicks are about the same as always.  That tells me that all these visitors are NOT friends and Supporters.  Hmmm.  I have a theory.   Actually I have four. 

The first one involves our "friends" in the media.  As far as I know, the ANP is the first NS organisation to raise funds this way.  It may have drawn their attention as a possibly news worthy story.

My second theory involves other NS groups.  They heard about what we're doing, and want to find out if it's working so they can try it as well.

My third one involves our opponents like the ADL, SPCL, and similar groups.  They may be concerned that we may raise enough revenue to become even more effective, and it worries them.

The last possibility is ZOG itself.  They heard about what we're doing, and they're keeping an even more watchful eye on us.

If it is other NS groups, then good luck to them.  If it is the media, we should be careful.  If any of you are known to them and they contact you, SAY NOTHING.  We're not doing anything illegal, but the media is not to be trusted.  Whatever we say, they'll twist it around and use it against us.  You all know that it's the duty of the press to protect the public from the "evil Nazis".  The best course of action is to say nothing.  If it is the ANTIFA, then we must be even MORE cautious.  They may try and put pressure on Google to remove us from the program.  As with the press, say nothing to anyone about this to any outsiders.  The same if it's ZOG.  You never know who you're talking to.  To outsiders, that may sound paranoid.  Even if I am, it doesn't mean I'm wrong!

I want to be clear.  This program is NOT classified.  On the other hand, let's not discuss it with every Tom, Dick, Harry, and Sally we meet either.  You don't have to be secretive, just low profile.

Anyone else have any thoughts on this?

Dan Schruender  88!



Tuesday, February 15, 2011

It's Not The Oil Company's Fault - It's OURS!

As we all know, gas prices have gone up quite a bit recently. Here in So. Cal., depending on where you go, the price of regular gas has gone up to $3.50. The corner station near me is charging $3.33 for regular, $3.34 for medium grade, and $3.53 for premium.

The oil companies are blaming this on the unrest in Egypt. What does Egypt have to do with the price of tea in China? Absolutely nothing, that's what. It's all a load of horse manure.

Egypt is ONE single oil producing country. It's not even the biggest producer. It's true that not much has come out of there since the protests began, but like I said, it's still only one country. The oil is still flowing from Saudi Arabia, Kuwait, Qatar, Bahrain, and most of the other Middle Eastern countries. Let's also not forget that oil is still coming out of Venezuela, Mexico, and the rest of the Latin American oil producing nations, as well as from the U.S. itself. So what's the problem?

The problem is the oil companies and the oil brokers. They're using the crisis in Egypt as an excuse to jack up prices and bleed us dry. Comrades, this is Judeo-Capitalism at it's finest. Businessmen would call it the law of supply and demand. I call it sticking it to people whenever you think you can get away with it!

So what can we do about it? Stage a protest? Yeah, that would do a lot of good. Besides, very few would be willing. Most would say, "What's the point?" Others would use the "W" excuse. "I don't have time, I have to work." And since the fat cats at the top don't work weekends, it would be pointless to go to some oil company on Saturday or Sunday. The only ones there would be security guards and maybe a few janitors. So forget protests.

There are two things we can really do.

Number one, get rid of those behemoths some of us drive. Why do you need a huge SUV when you never go off roading? I'll tell you why. You don't need them, you just want them. It's a status symbol. "Hey look at me, I have a Ford Escape with 8 cylinders and four-wheel-drive. I'm successful! Eat your hearts out peasants!" Well, if that's important to you, then pay the oil company's blackmail and quit complaining. You brought it on yourself.

Why do you have some huge pickup truck and you work in an office? It's so shiny and pretty. It's obvious it's never done a day's work. Again, you don't need it, you want it. So pay $75 a tank and shut up.

BTW, if you own an SUV, you're getting screwed by BOTH the motor vehicle department AND your insurance company. Motor vehicles charges you extra for registration if you have four-wheel-drive, as does your insurance company. If you have an SUV, it's even worse. What does the "S" in SUV stand for? Sport. As in Sport Utility Vehicle. In California, that word "sport" legally makes it a sports car. The DMV charges extra for sports cars, and extra for four-wheel-drive. Insurance companies charge extra for each as well, so you're getting screwed four times over if you drive an SUV. You deserve it. You bought something big and wasteful because it makes you feel big-time. So pay the price and quit your whining. Or you could get rid of these monstrosities and drive something more sensible, and forget about these stupid, wasteful four-wheeled toys.

The other way to send a message WITHOUT really getting off your asses and doing something. The guys that run the corner gas station near me say they make more money from the convenience store than from the gas. It's probably true. Most people who get gas at these places also walk out with an armful of junk food and super-sized sodas. So that's where we hit them.

Since we have to have our gas to get around, especially here in California where the average commute is 50 miles each way, the convenience store is where we hit them. The next time you get gas, skip the snacks. They're nothing but processed poison anyway. Just get your gas. No junk food. If you have to have a snack, go to some Mom and Pop package store. It's the same stuff at more or less the same price.

But then again, people won't want to do that either. People want their status symbols. The oil companies count on that. I once spoke to a mid-level management person from Valero Oil Company. He told me studies have proven that people will pay whatever they demand, as long as prices don't rise too fast. They know how much they can push the people, statistically speaking. Prices go up a lot, then come down a little, and people go, "Whew! Thank God prices came down a bit." Then it happens again, and again, and again.

Plus people are basically lazy. If they need gas AND want a snack, they don't want to be bothered going to the gas station, AND a package store. "Aw, I don't have time. I'm in a hurry." No, you just don't want to be bothered, so again, pay the blackmail and shut up.

I remember when prices were $0.30 a gallon. That was forty years ago, but you must realise that that means prices have risen by over 300 percent in forty years. Prices are expected to go up a little, but 300 percent is outrageous!

There are a few things we can do. The problem is, unless enough people are willing to do it, it won't make any difference. It will require sacrifice, and effort. Most people don't want to be bothered. Fine. Do whatever you want, which I'm sure in the case of most people will be whatever is easiest. That means keeping their gas hogs, and buying crap at the oil company's convenience store. Well go ahead. I just don't want to hear you bitching about the high prices. They won't come down unless you're willing to make a little effort. On the contrary, they'll continue to go up. The problem isn't really the oil companies. It's all of us. We have allowed ourselves to become their financial slaves, and we are the only ones who can put an end to it. What's it going to be? Greed and slavery, or sacrifice and freedom. It's your choice. It's OUR choice. Comrades, let's all make the right one.

One last thing. Comrades, some of you have been neglecting your duties. Let's get with it! Things went much better say, the previous Monday than yesterday. It doesn't take but a few minutes, so let's get it done!

Oh, and don't forget my two new archives blogs. I've added linkes in the "White Friendly Sites" section.

Dan Schruender 88!

Monday, February 14, 2011

Housing crash hitting cities thought to be stable

New wave of distress now affecting areas where boom was relatively restrained

By DAVID STREITFELD
The New York Times
updated 1 hour 9 minutes ago 2011-02-14T03:29:30

SEATTLE — Few believed the housing market here would ever collapse. Now they wonder if it will ever stop slumping.

The rolling real estate crash that ravaged Florida and the Southwest is delivering a new wave of distress to communities once thought to be immune — economically diversified cities where the boom was relatively restrained.

In the last year, home prices in Seattle had a bigger price decline than in Las Vegas. Minneapolis dropped more than Miami, and Atlanta fared worse than Phoenix.

The bubble markets, where builders, buyers and banks ran wild, began falling first, economists say, so they are close to the end of the cycle and in some cases on their way back up. Nearly everyone else still has another season of pain.

“When I go out and talk to people around town, they say, ‘Wow, I thought we were going to have a 12 percent correction and call it a day,’ ” said Stan Humphries, chief economist for the housing site Zillow, which is based in Seattle. “But this thing just keeps on going.”

Still dropping

Seattle is down about 31 percent from its mid-2007 peak and, according to Zillow’s calculations, still has as much as 10 percent to fall. Mr. Humphries estimates the rest of the country will drop a further 5 and 7 percent as last year’s tax credits for home buyers continue to wear off.

“We went into 2010 feeling gangbusters, thanks to Uncle Sam,” Mr. Humphries said. “We ended it feeling penniless, with home values tanking.”

The fact that even a fairly prosperous area like Seattle was ensnared in the downturn shows just how much of a national phenomenon the crash has been. The slump began when the low-quality loans that drove the latter stage of the boom began to go bad, but the resulting recession greatly enlarged the crisis. Many people could not get a mortgage, and others simply gave up the hunt.

Now, though the overall economy seems to be mending, housing remains stubbornly weak. That presents a vexing problem for the Obama administration, which has introduced several initiatives intended to help homeowners, with mixed success.

CoreLogic, a data firm, said last week that American home prices fell 5.5 percent in 2010, back to the recession low of March 2009. New home sales are scraping along the bottom. Mortgage applications are near a 15-year low, boding ill for the rest of the winter.

It has been a long, painful slide. At the peak, a downturn in real estate in Seattle was nearly unthinkable. In September 2006, after prices started falling in many parts of the country but were still increasing here, The Seattle Times noted that the last time prices in the city dropped on a quarterly basis was during the severe recession of 1982.

Two local economists were quoted all but guaranteeing that Seattle was immune “if history is any indication.” A risk index from PMI Mortgage Insurance gave the odds of Seattle prices dropping at a negligible 11 percent.

Hoping for the best

These days, the mood here is chastened when not downright fatalistic. If a recovery depends on a belief in better times, that seems a long way off.

Those who must sell close their eyes and hope for the best. Those who hope to buy see lower prices but often have lighter wallets, removing any sense of urgency.

Arne Klubberud and Melissa Lee-Klubberud paid $358,000 for a new, 960-square-foot townhouse on trendy Capitol Hill a few weeks after that Seattle Times article was published. Now, with one child and with hopes for more, they need more space. They just put the townhouse on the market for $300,000.

“Obviously, this is not the ideal situation,” said Ms. Lee-Klubberud, a 32-year-old lawyer. They are hoping to take advantage of the sour market to buy at a good price, but first, they must sell for an amount that is acceptable. “Everyone has their limits,” she said. “We have ours.”

On a dark, dank Sunday, a handful of people came to look at the three-level unit. One of them was Katherine Davis, who had just sold her house in the far eastern suburbs. It took 14 months, during which she had to drop the price several times. The equity she had accumulated over the decades disappeared quickly.

“At first, I thought it would be nice to come out of this with $200,000, but I adjusted my expectations,” Ms. Davis said. She ended up with less than half of that. Her goal is to buy a small place in the city, but not yet. “Selfishly, I’m hoping the market continues to drop,” she said.

Increasing numbers of sellers are simply surrendering.

Accidental landlords

Megan and Ryan Dortch tried to sell their one-bedroom Eastlake condo for $325,000 two years ago. They rejected an offer of $295,000 as inadequate. A year later, they relisted it for $289,000, then $279,000, which was less than they paid. Without a sale at that price, they could not afford to buy a place big enough for them and their new baby.

They have given up on real estate. They are renting out their old apartment at a small loss every month, and living in a rented house. “I don’t expect the market to get better,” said Ms. Dortch, 31, a customer service consultant.

Neither does Gene Burrus, another frustrated seller who became a landlord. “Rent is so cheap it doesn’t make sense to buy now,” he said. He might reconsider if 10 or 15 percent more comes out of the market.

Redfin, a real estate brokerage firm based in Seattle, says foot traffic began picking up in the last several weeks. Mortgage rates are rising, which could nudge those who need to buy to make a deal now for fear rates will rise even more.

But whenever the market finally does pick up, all those accidental landlords will want to unload, putting another burden on the market. “So many sellers are waiting in the shadows,” said Redfin’s chief executive, Glenn Kelman. “The inventory is going to expand and expand and expand. I don’t see any basis for significant price increases.”

While almost every economist is expecting another round of price declines for the next few months, many see a leveling off in the second half of the year. Fiserv, the company that produces the monthly Case-Shiller Home Price Indexes, analyzed prices in 375 communities. About three-quarters of them will be stable by December, Fiserv calculates.

“We’re at a period near the bottom but with more volatility than we normally see at this point,” said David Stiff, Fiserv’s chief economist. “This sort of double dip is unprecedented for housing.”

Maybe that is why belief in a bottom is as elusive now as fears of a top were in 2006.

“We would love to have a house,” said Dan Cunningham, a 41-year-old renter. “I have more than enough for a down payment. I’m preapproved for a loan. But I have to have confidence it’s not going to lose another 20 percent.” He plans to wait until he sees prices rising before making any offers.

This story, "Housing crash is hitting cities thought to be stable," originally appeared in The New York Times.

Copyright © 2010 The New York Times

Comment:

And the Obama administration keeps telling us things are getting better. Well, according to the above article, it certainly isn't in the real estate market. How many more people will have to lose their homes before they realise that the system SIMPLY DOES NOT WORK?

It seems that even when people hit rock bottom, they attribute it to either their own fault, or simple bad luck. Well it is their own fault. The people have allowed themselves to be enslaved by the Judeo-Capitalists. If they had spoken out against the Federal Reserve System when it first started back in 1913, we wouldn't be in this mess.

We need a solid economy, independent of the New World Order Global system which will only serve to increase the International Jewish Banksters' and their Judeo-Capitalist allies' stranglehold on us.

National Socialism accomplished this in Germany. We can do it again here, but only if we are willing to work hard and make sacrifices.

Comrades, I'm not going to start preaching. All I'm going to say is if we fail, it won't be because I didn't work my ass off, and do my share of sacrificing. How about you?

Dan Schruender 88!

Sunday, February 13, 2011

That's Three Now!

You know how when you get something new, or sign up for something new, there's all kinds of fine print to read? How many of us actually read all that stuff? I usually just skim it. But when you do that, you miss a lot.

As most of you know, I've created an educational blog called the National Socialist Historical Archives, where you can find a lot of great Third Reich photos, Hitler Speeches, biographies, music, and other things of interest. Am I crazy or what? I was up until 3:00 AM messing around with this. Crazy or dedicated? Probably both.

The next step was to get it on AdSense as well. I was trying to submit it for consideration, when a box came up telling me it was unnecessary. Without going into a lot of internet technical explanations, once you're on the program, ANY blog you create is already in the program.

With that in mind, I'm creating a third blog. This one is dedicated to Commander George Lincoln Rockwell and the early history of the ANP. It's called the American National Socialist Historical Archives. It's like the other one, except it's dedicated to Rockwell, while the other is dedicated to Hitler and the Third Reich. It will also have pictures and writings and other cool educational material.

I've added a link for both blogs in the "White Friendly Sites" section. But here are the urls:
www.nationalsocialistarchives.blogspot.com and www.ansharchives.blogspot.com

I'm sure I need say nothing more. Thanks comrades. The ANP and myself appreciate your support and efforts.

Saturday, February 12, 2011

Media Confusion Over Birthright Citizenship

By Jeremy Beck, Monday, February 7, 2011, 11:46 AM EST

On the first day of the 112th Congress, Rep. Steve King (R-IA) of the House Immigration Subcommittee introduced the Birthright Citizenship Act of 2011, H.R. 140, which would amend "the Immigration and Nationality Act to consider a person born in the United States 'subject to the jurisdiction' of the United States for citizenship at birth purposes if the person is born in the United States of parents, one of whom is: (1) a U.S. citizen or national; (2) a lawful permanent resident alien whose residence is in the United States; or (3) an alien performing active service in the U.S. Armed Forces." With the Congressional balance of power now in the hands of those who favor tighter immigration controls, the Birthright Citizenship Act (introduced in previous years by former Congressman, and current Governor of Georgia, Nathan Deal) is a front page national immigration story...and the source of great misunderstanding for journalists who cover it.

Reporters confuse their readers when they state something as a fact in one sentence, then call it an "interpretation" in the next. But such is the failure of media to grasp the birthright citizenship and the Fourteenth Amendment issues that the Atlanta Journal-Constitution wrote that legislators "are targeting the 14th Amendment, which automatically grants U.S. citizenship to babies born on U.S. soil even if their parents are here illegally. The lawmakers disagree with that interpretation, and they are attempting to force the issue into the courts for a decision.”

A blog in The Hill, a Washington, D.C. paper, reported that Rep. King "thinks he'll be able to pass a bill out of the House to end the Constitution's birthright citizenship for U.S.-born children of illegal immigrants" in one sentence, then quoted Rep. King stating the exact opposite: "'It's not a constitutional provision. It doesn't require a constitutional amendment. We can fix it by statute,' he said." Rep. King's bill clearly states that it "amends the Immigration and Nationality Act," and makes no mention of changing the Constitution.

The Immigration and Nationality Act is the federal statute that grants automatic citizenship to anyone born in the United States. It uses similar language to the 14th Amendment regarding persons born in the United States and "subject to the jurisdiction thereof." A serious and scholarly debate over the meaning of "subject to the jurisdiction thereof" is ongoing and by no means settled. Some scholars insist that the phrase has no real meaning of its own, but rather is essentially another way of saying "born in the United States." Other scholars conclude that the authors of the Fourteenth Amendment did NOT want to grant citizenship to every person who happened to be born on U.S. soil. Both sides have evidence to support their claims, but the only opinion that matters is that of the Supreme Court, which has yet to rule on this specific question.

Sen. Lindsay Graham (R-SC) may have thrown reporters off the scent when he ignited a media firestorm last summer summer by telling Fox News that he favored a Constitutional amendment to end automatic birthright citizenship. But Sen. Graham isn't leading this effort. The primary vehicle for ending automatic birthright citizenship is Rep. King's H.R. 140, which would only change the federal statute.

Reporters have a hard enough job to do these days without handing down Supreme Court decisions. If Rep. King is successful in passing H.R. 140, it will likely force a Supreme Court decision. Until that decision is handed down, journalists can relieve themselves of the burden of judgment by attributing any opinion on the question of the constitutionality of H.R. 140 to its source. Reporters can further clarify the issue for their readers by noting that only a ruling from the Supreme Court can put an end to the debate.

JEREMY BECK is the Director of Media Standards Project for NumbersUSA

NumbersUSA's blogs are copyrighted and may be republished or reposted only if they are copied in their entirety, including this paragraph, and provide proper credit to NumbersUSA. NumbersUSA bears no responsibility for where our blogs may be republished or reposted.

Comment:

The media isn't confused about anything. The wealthy, AKA Judeo-Capitalists do not want to stop the flow of their slave-labour workforce. The media is 95% Jewish owned. All anyone has to do is check who the CEO's of the major media outlets are to prove this. ABC, NBC, CBS, FOX, et al are all Jewish owned/controlled. That includes the newspapers like the Jew York Times, the LA Times, the Chicago Tribune, the Baltimore Herald, the Wall Street Journal, and most other big papers. The reporters are reporting what they're told to report in the way they are told to.

Then there are the bleeding hearts. They are accusing the anti-immigration people of trying to usurp the Fourteenth Amendment. But as I've said before, they Fourteenth Amendment was never, never intended as a backdoor to citizenship for illegals. It was to protect the children of LEGAL immigrants, freed slaves, and Native Americans who had become citizens for having to go through the naturalisation process like their parents.

Dan Schruender 88!


Friday, February 11, 2011

It Looks Like I'm Famous!

Dear,

It is my pleasure to inform you that you have been nominated for inclusion in this year’s edition of Who's Who among Executives and Professionals: http://msg.gbresponder.com/blldT0xNSZyPTMzMCZtPTMxMjMmdHlwZT1iJnA9ZjkwNjU3NzgmbD0zMDcy

There is no fee or obligation to be listed in this publication. However, we must receive verification from you that your profile is accurate.

After receiving verification, we will validate your registry listing within seven business days.

Once finalized, your listing will share prominent registry space with thousands of fellow accomplished individuals across the globe, each representing his or her professional field and geographical region.

As a member of the registry, you are also afforded a unique networking opportunity with other professionals and potential employers across a range of industries, as well as business coaching opportunities from industry experts.

Of course, this unique accolade would be a welcome addition to any resume.

To verify your profile and accept the candidacy, please click here: http://msg.gbresponder.com/blldT0xNSZyPTMzMCZtPTMxMjMmdHlwZT1iJnA9ZjkwNjU3NzgmbD0zMDcy

Regards,

Jason Price

PS. Our registration deadline is February 15, 2011. In order to guarantee your inclusion, your verification must be completed on or before this date. On behalf of our committee,
congratulations on your achievement and welcome to our association.

Here is the link once again: http://msg.gbresponder.com/blldT0xNSZyPTMzMCZtPTMxMjMmdHlwZT1iJnA9ZjkwNjU3NzgmbD0zMDcy


2885 Sanford Ave SW #13631 Grandville MI 49418 United States

Comment:

This turd is a real winner. Note the heading. He didn't even write dear sir or madam. Just "Dear,".

Again, my email address was absent, and instead said, "Undisclosed recipients." Again, my name appears nowhere. You'd have to be a feeb to fall for this one. It says to verify your profile. In other words, they want you to give them all your information. If you do, even if they don't ask for your bank account number, the next thing you know is you'll be getting bills from credit cards in your name that you never had, and cell phone bills from companies you never did business with.

I know I've done a lot of these scam posts in the last couple of weeks, but this is a brand new one to me and I just wanted you all to see it.

Thursday, February 10, 2011

Additional Ad Info...

There are additional ads on the "comments" pages. Check them out.

BTW, thank you for all your support. An interesting news post is below the ads. You'll learn just what states are using E-Verify to keep illegals from taking our jobs and which aren't. Does California? Find out below.

Map of States with Mandatory E-Verify Laws



E-Verify is an Internet-based system operated by U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) in partnership with the Social Security Administration (SSA). E-Verify is currently free to employers and is available in all 50 states. It provides an automated link to federal databases to help employers determine employment eligibility of new hires and the validity of their Social Security numbers. While its usage remains voluntary throughout the country, some states have passed legislation making its use mandatory for certain businesses.

States Requiring the use of E-Verify, and a few who don't (Descriptions of each state below)

UPDATED: February 7, 2011

Alabama

Alabama state legislators plan to introduce E-Verify legislation this year.

Arizona

HB 2779 (Arizona Fair and Legal Employment Act) - Passed in 2007, HB 2779 prohibits employers from knowingly hiring undocumented workers and requires all employers to use E-Verify, effective January 1, 2008. It was followed up in 2008 with HB 2745, which prohibits government contracts to any businesses not using E-Verify, effective May 1, 2008.

Arkansas

HB1013 -- HB1013 doesn't require the use of E-Verify for state contractors, but it allows the contractors licensing board to revoke a contractors license if the contractor knowingly hires illegal aliens. State contractors who use E-Verify are protected under the bill.

California

I am shocked! There is actually legislation pending on this!

Colorado

HB 1343 - Passed in 2006, HB 1343 prohibits state agencies from entering into contract agreements with contractors who knowingly employ illegal aliens and requires prospective contractors use E-Verify to ensure legal work status of all employees. In 2008, SB 193 was passed requiring contractors with state contracts to use E-Verify. The effective date for SB 193 is August 6, 2008.

Connecticut -- None, except in the town of Stepford. lol

Delaware

SB15 - SB15, introduced with bipartisan support from State Sens. Booth and Ennis, would require all public employers to use E-Verify to screen new hires. The bill also requires the use of E-Verify for individuals applying for public benefits.

Florida

Executive Order - In January 2011, Gov. Rick Scott signed an executive order requiring all state agencies to use E-Verify. There are also immigration enforcement bills being drafted that would require all employers to use E-Verify.

The Florida Citizens Employment Protection Act would mandate for all employers the use of E-Verify for new hires. The bill would also suspend business licenses for employers who don't sign an affidavit declaring that they have no illegal aliens working for them. The bill is likely to meet resistance at the committee level.

Georgia

The Georgia State Legislature is holding joint hearings on whether or not to mandate E-Verify for all employers in the state. State contractors are already required to use E-Verify.
SB 529 - Passed in 2006, SB 529 requires public employers, contractors and subcontractors with 500 or more employees to participate in E-Verify for all new employees, effective July 1, 2007. Public employers, contractors and subcontractors with more than 100 employees (but less than 500) must use E-Verify on or before July 1, 2008 and public employers, contractors and subcontractors with fewer than 100 employees must use E-Verify on or before July 1, 2009.

Hawaii

HB1485 -- HB1485 requires all state contractors and agencies to use E-Verify for new hires. I am personally delightfully surprised with Hawaii.

Idaho

Executive Order - In May, 2009, Gov. Butch Otter signed an executive order requiring all state agencies and contractors to use E-Verify if they wanted a share of the state's $1.24 billion from the economic stimulus bill. In December 2006, Governor Jim Risch also issued an executive order, with immediate effect, requiring that state agencies participate in the E-Verify system.

Illinois

S1133 - In 2007, HB 1744 temporarily barred Illinois companies from enrolling in any Employment Eligibility Verification System until accuracy and timeliness issues are resolved. Illinois also enacted HB 1743, which created privacy and anti-discrimination protections for workers if employers participating in E-Verify don’t follow the program’s procedures. On August 24, 2009, Illinois enacted S1133, which overturned the E-Verify ban, but prohibited the state or its localities from requiring employers to use an employment eligibility verification system and required businesses to jump through a number of hoops before they can use E-Verify.

Indiana

Sen. Mike Delph is expected to introduce legislation that would mandate the use of E-Verify. A bill introduced by Sen. Delph passed in the state senate in 2010 before stalling in the state house.

Kansas

HB 2026 - HB 2026 would mandate the use of E-Verify for state and local governments as well as companies contracting with the state government. Kansas Secretary of State Kris Kobach, who has assisted other states including Arizona in drafting state-level immigration enforcement legislation, helps the bill's chances, but it could get resistance from the Kansas Chamber of Commerce and newly-elected Governor Sam Brownback.

Kentucky

HB3 - HB3 would require state contractors to check all new hires using E-Verify. Any compnay that contracts with the state and fails to use the system could face a five-year ban of contracting with the state.

State House Speaker Greg Stumbo is working on legislation that would mandate E-Verify for all employers in Kentucky.

Maine

E-Verify bill proposed, but not yet out of committee.

Michigan

Two bills offered by Rep. Dave Agema would require the use of E-Verify. HB 4355 would require state agencies and contractors to use E-Verify. HB 4969 would require employment agencies that refer workers to the state government to use the verification system.

Minnesota

Executive Order - In January 2008, Governor Tim Pawlenty issued an executive order effective, January 29, 2008, stating that all hiring authorities within the executive branch of state government as well as any employer seeking to enter into a state contract worth in excess of $50,000 must participate in the E-Verify program.

However, in Minnesota Executive Orders expire 90 days after the Governor that signed them leaves office. New Minnesota Governor, Mark Dayton, has indicated that he'll allow Pawlenty's Executive Order expire in 2011.

Emmer Amendment - In February, 2009, Rep. Tom Emmer offered and the State House approved an amendment requiring the mandatory use of E-Verify for anyone receiving funds from a $1 billion stimulus bill.

Mississippi

SB 2988 - Passed in 2008, SB 2988 requires public and private employers to participate in E-Verify with a phase in period beginning in 2008 and full participation by 2011. All government agencies and businesses with more than 250 employees were required to comply by July 1, 2008. Companies with 100-250 employees must comply by July 1, 2009, companies with 30-100 employees by July 1, 2010 and the remaining companies by July 1, 2011.

Missouri

HB 1549 - Passed in 2008, HB 1549 requires all public employers to use E-Verify. If a court finds that a business knowingly employed someone not authorized to work, the company’s business permit and licenses shall be suspended for 14 days. Upon the first violation, the state may terminate contracts and bar the company from doing business with the state for 3 years. Upon the second violation, the state may permanently debar the company from doing business with the state.

Nebraska

L403 - Passed in 2009, LB403 requires state and local governments and contractors to use E-Verify effective October 1, 2009. The bill also includes incentives for private employers to use E-Verify.

Nevada

A bill being drafted by Assemblyman Pat Hickey would require all business to use E-Verify and would levy fines and possible revocation of business license for businesses that knowingly hire illegal aliens.

Secretary of State Ross Miller has also proposed that all state agencies be required to use E-Verify.

New Hampshire -- None. Shame on my home state.

Jew York -- None. Figures, doesn't it?

North Carolina

SB 1523 - Passed in 2006, SB 1523 requires all state agencies, offices, and universities to use E-Verify. The law applied to all employees hired after January 1, 2007 except for local education agencies which was March 1, 2007.

Oklahoma

HB 1804 (Oklahoma Taxpayer and Citizen Protection Act) - Passed in 2007 and made effective on November 1, 2007, HB 1804 requires public employers, contractors and subcontractors to participate in E-Verify and requires income tax withholding for independent contractors who do not have valid Social Security numbers.

Oregon

HB 2806, introduced by Rep. Thatcher, would require state agencies and state contractors to use E-Verify for new hires. HB2973, introduced by Rep. Jenson would require all employers to use E-Verify.

Pennsylvania

Rep. Daryl Metcalfe is one of the leading supporters of immigration enforcement at the state level. He's already introduced legislation to end birthright citizenship at the state level and an Arizona-style enforcement bill. He's also expected to introduce legislation that would require employers to use E-Verify.

Rhode Island

Executive Order - In March 2008, Governor Carcieri issued an executive order requiring executive agencies to use E-Verify; and for all persons and businesses, including grantees, contractors and their subcontractors and vendors to use E-Verify. However, in January 2011, newly-elected Gov. Lincoln Chafee reversed the executive order.

South Carolina

HB 4400 - Passed in 2008, HB 4400 requires the mandatory use of E-Verify for all employers by July 1, 2010. All public employers, private employers with more than 100 employees and public contractors with more than 500 employees were required to comply by January 1, 2009. All private employers must comply by July 1, 2009 and all other all businesses by January 1, 2010.

Tennessee

Rep. Joe Carr is expected to introduce E-Verify legislation.

Texas

Rep. Ken Paxson, who ran for House Speaker in Texas, supports a mandatory E-Verify law. Gov. Rick Perry has made it a priority to end sanctuary city policies, but he hasn't expressed support to mandate E-Verify, and the legislation would receive resistance from business groups in the state.

Utah

SB0251 - Passed in 2010, SB0251 requires all employers with more than 15 employees to begin using E-Verify July 1, 2011. Usage between now and the effective date is voluntary. Companies that utilize legal guest workers do not have to use E-Verify.

SB 81 - Passed in 2008 and made effective on July 1, 2009, SB 81 requires public employers, public contractors and subcontractors to E-Verify and makes it illegal to discharge a lawful employee while retaining an unauthorized alien in the same job category.

Vermont -- Considering they were the first to pass Gay Civil Unions, no surprises here.

Virginia

HB737 - Passed in 2010, HB737 requires all state agencies to begin using E-Verify by December 1, 2012.

HB 1727 (Virginia Fair Employment Act) would require all state contractors, state agencies, and private employers with 15 or more employees to use E-Verify.

Washington

Respect Washington is a grassroots initiative in Washington to end illegal immigration by eliminating the magnets that foster it.The I-1122 ballot initiative would require all Washington businesses, public and private, to use E-Verify. If the petition gathers enough signatures, the initiative will be placed on a statewide ballot in the fall.

HB 1272 - HB 1272 would require all state employment placement offices to use E-Verify to check the status of new hires.