You seem to be having a graph reading problem. 14% of respondents in 1996 thought they would retire at +65.

Yes and yes again. I vote Green now not so much for what they would do in office – I recognize the odds against that occurring – but because it might convince one of the two parties (most likely Dems) to move in their direction so as not to lose votes to them. If we want a movement to the left we need a threat from the left.

Then none of you are actually familiar with Scalia. Property rights, for him, are inviolate. The only ones that are. Hence this decision comports with most of his jurisprudence. If this were predicated on individual rights he would be on the other side. None of the votes here were surprising including that of the so-called liberal Breyer. Actually Thomas is a little surprising. He isn’t always Scalia’s lapdog. Just most of the time.

Ah yes Chris Christie, hero of Sandy.

Except for the fact that he just signed into law a bill that makes it possible for banks to foreclose on “abandoned” residential properties without notice to their owners. By the way “abandoned” is defined in a way that sounds an awful lot like a lot of the properties damaged by Sandy:

P.L.2012, CHAPTER 70, approved December 3, 2012

Senate, No. 2156 (First Reprint)

AN ACT establishing a summary action to foreclose mortgages on vacant and abandoned residential property and supplementing chapter 50 of Title 2A of the New Jersey Statutes.

BE IT ENACTED by the Senate and General Assembly of the State of New Jersey:

^1. |a. For the purposes of this section, “vacant and abandoned” residential property means residential real estate with respect to which the mortgagee proves, by clear and convincing evidence, that the mortgaged real estate is vacant and has been abandoned. Real property shall be deemed “vacant and abandoned” if the court finds that the mortgaged property is not occupied by a mortgagor or tenant as evidenced by a lease agreement entered into prior to the service of a notice of intention to commence foreclosure according to section 4 of the “Fair Foreclosure Act,” P.L.1995, c.244 (C.2A:50-56), and at least two of the following conditions exist:

(1) overgrown or neglected vegetation;

(2) the accumulation of newspapers, circulars, flyers or mail on the property;

(3) disconnected gas, electric, or water utility services to the property;

(4) the accumulation of hazardous, noxious, or unhealthy substances or materials on the property;

(5) the accumulation of junk, litter, trash or debris on the property;

(6) the absence of window treatments such as blinds, curtains or shutters;

(7) the absence of furnishings and personal items;

(8) statements of neighbors, delivery persons, or government employees indicating that the residence is vacant and abandoned;

(9) windows or entrances to the property that are boarded up or closed off or multiple window panes that are damaged, broken and unrepaired;

(10) doors to the property that are smashed through, broken off, unhinged, or continuously unlocked;

(11) a risk to the health, safety or welfare of the public, or any adjoining or adjacent property owners, exists due to acts of vandalism, loitering, criminal conduct, or the physical destruction or deterioration of the property;

(12) an uncorrected violation of a municipal building, housing, or similar code during the preceding year, or an order by municipal authorities declaring the property to be unfit for occupancy and to remain vacant and unoccupied;

(13) the mortgagee or other authorized party has secured or winterized the property due to the property being deemed vacant and unprotected or in danger of freezing;

(14) a written statement issued by any mortgagor expressing the clear intent of all mortgagors to abandon the property;

(15) any other reasonable indicia of abandonment.

b. For the purposes of this section, a residential property shall not be considered “vacant and abandoned” if, on the property:

(1) there is an unoccupied building which is undergoing construction, renovation, or rehabilitation that is proceeding diligently to completion, and the building is in compliance with all applicable ordinances, codes, regulations, and statutes;

(2) there is a building occupied on a seasonal basis, but otherwise secure; or

(3) there is a building that is secure, but is the subject of a probate action, action to quiet title, or other ownership dispute.

c. In addition to the residential mortgage foreclosure procedures set out in the “Fair Foreclosure Act,” P.L.1995, c.244 (C.2A:50-53 et seq.), a summary action to foreclose a mortgage debt secured by residential property that is vacant and abandoned may be brought by a lender in the Superior Court. In addition, a lender may, at any time after filing a foreclosure action, file with the court, in accordance with the Rules Governing the Courts of the State of New Jersey, an application to proceed in a summary manner because the residential property that is the subject of the foreclosure action is believed to be “vacant and abandoned”; provided, however, that this section shall not apply to a foreclosure of a timeshare interest secured by a mortgage.

d. (1) In addition to the service of process required by the Rules of Court, a lender shall establish, for the entry of a residential foreclosure judgment under this section, that a process server has made two unsuccessful attempts to serve the mortgagor or occupant at the residential property, which attempts must be at least 72 hours apart, and during different times of the day, either before noon, between noon and 6 P.M., or between 6 P.M. and 10 P.M.

(2) In addition to any notices required to be served by law or the Rules of Court, a lender shall, with any order to show cause served as original service of process or a motion to proceed summarily, serve a notice that the lender is seeking, on the return date of the order to show cause, or on the date fixed by the court, to proceed summarily for entry of a residential foreclosure judgment because the property is vacant and abandoned.

(3) When a property is deemed vacant and abandoned as herein defined, a lender shall not be required to serve the debtor with the notice to cure required by section 6 of the “Fair Foreclosure Act,” P.L.1995, c.244 (C.2A:50-58).

e. (1) The court may enter a final residential mortgage foreclosure judgment under this section upon a finding, (a) by clear and convincing evidence, that the residential property is vacant and abandoned as defined under subsection a. of this section, and (b) that a review of the pleadings and documents filed with the court, as required by the Rules of Court, supports the entry of a final residential mortgage foreclosure judgment.

(2) A final residential mortgage foreclosure judgment under this section shall not be entered if the court finds that:

(a) the property is not vacant or abandoned,; or

(b) the mortgagor or any other defendant has filed an answer, appearance, or other written objection that is not withdrawn and the defenses or objection asserted provide cause to preclude the entry of a final residential mortgage foreclosure judgment.

f. If a final residential mortgage foreclosure judgment under this section is not entered on the original or adjourned return date of an order to show cause or the date fixed by the court to proceed summarily, the court may direct that the foreclosure action continue on the normal track for residential mortgage foreclosure actions for properties that are not vacant and abandoned and the notice to cure served with the order to show cause or the order fixing that date for the matter to proceed summarily shall be of no effect.

g. All actions brought to foreclose on real property pursuant to this section shall proceed in accordance with the Rules of the Court.

h. Nothing in this section is intended to supersede or limit other procedures adopted by the Court to resolve residential mortgage foreclosure actions, including, but not limited to, foreclosure mediation.

i. Nothing in this section shall be construed to affect the rights of a tenant to possession of a leasehold interest under the Anti-Eviction Act, P.L.1974, c.49 (C.2A:18-61.1 et seq.), the “New Jersey Foreclosure Fairness Act,” P.L.2009, c.296 (C.2A:50-69 et seq.), or any other applicable law.

j. Notwithstanding paragraph (3) of subsection a. of section 12 of P.L.1995 c.244 (C.2A:50-64) to the contrary, if the court makes a finding in the foreclosure judgment that the property is vacant and abandoned, the sheriff shall sell the property within 60 days of the sheriff’s receipt of any writ of execution issued by the court. If it becomes apparent that the sheriff cannot comply with the provisions of this subsection, the foreclosing plaintiff may apply to the court for an order appointing a Special Master or judicial agent to hold the foreclosure sale.

Actually the reason that people don’t grow their businesses is the certainty that the taxes they pay on the money they withdraw from their business is so low that the marginal utility of hiring more people or otherwise investing in their business is virtually eradicated. Raise taxes on businesses and high earning individuals so that the marginal utility of investment is greater than that in taking profits.

Because this is not a path to citizenship and because it does not provide any guarantees or protection, it looks like a really dangerous path to take. Provide the government with information which it can eventually use against you and/or your family. I suspect enrollment will not look anything like what it could be.

It seems somewhat more likely that this is part of the continuing war on foreign banks. Have you noticed that virtualy all of the banks that have been specifically targeted in recent high profile cases have been foreign banks doing business in the U.S.? Do you really think U.S. banks have not been similarly engaged? It is all part of making it too expensive to do business here securing banking (worldwide that is) for the U.S. banks by limiting foreign bank’s access to the U.S. market or by limiting their ability to do the type of business that U.S. banks are doing around the world. We are, after all, one of, if not the largest off-shore banking havens in the world. This is how the .01% fight among themselves over the spoils of their wars with everyone else.

It must also be noted that our banks and our banking regulations have conducted a type of warfare against the rest of the world wherein it was necessary (or seemed so) to adopt our tactics in order to compete.

I have watched with great dismay our virtual war in this regard with Switzerland and Swiss banks and their utter inability to recognize the attack for what it is. The “American way” was not inevitable but a good portion of the world simply did not and is still reluctant to recognize that the U.S. takes no prisoners in economic warfare and that the only way to respond to us is by making us into the international pariah we in fact are.

The problem then, I assume you are saying, is the prosecution of whistleblowers not the selective leaking which seems to be the focus of all the hubbub.