Catherine Austin Fitts talks about it in 2004.
On the 29th of October (of 2003), a trial begins in a Federal courtroom in Washington DC. The defendant in the case is our own distinguished advisory board member Catherine Austin Fitts. The plaintiff in the case is one John Ervin of Ervin Associates, a mortgage servicer for HUD. Ervin has brought the case using a Federal whistle blower statute (qui tam) [i] that allows private citizens to bring suit against parties alleged to have defrauded the government, and rewards them with a percentage of the recovered money. Ervin began eight years ago with more than 30 offences alleged against Fitts. He is now down to a handful, technical and immaterial in their financial impact one way or another on the government, Fitts, or anyone else. The case is ironic in many respects. Fitts, a HUD contractor, was fired "for convenience," which does not mean that she was terminated for wrongdoing. Ervin and Asscoiates themselves were fired some time back by HUD "for cause," meaning that they were fired for non-performance under a contract. Yet here Ervin is taking Fitts to court, ostensibly on behalf of the government and taxpayer.
http://www.financialsense.com/Experts/2004/AustinFitts.html
http://www.scoop.co.nz/stories/HL0310/S00223.htm
This could be avoided when Government was accurate with their decision making. Consider that most American can only afford a $100,000 worth of home but allowing them to have $300,000 loan for a house.
spectrum2000now 1 year ago
@spectrum2000now that wasnt the real issue: securitizing those was the real problem. The real issue was that the mortgage companies were allowed to chop up every mortgage and sell it piecemeal, bundled with other pieces as "securities". That way they had no skin in the game so they gave away insane deals. They are still doing it with commercial real estate and it will 2 blow up in the taxpayers' face.
madashelldude 1 year ago