#pay day is exploitable and thus makes sense to be banned | Explore Tumblr posts and blogs

spoilsoflore · 7 years ago

Text

Life Update: Politics & Gaming

I apologize for all the word vomit to follow; but, I have a lot to say, and I feel it needs to be said. For your convenience, the following information is split into two parts: politics and "Spoils of Lore" info. If you're not interested in the former--which I don't remotely blame you if you aren't--feel free to scroll down to the bottom section. Also, as always, please feel free to leave any responses. Although I may not respond and/or agree, I wholly endorse the presence of multiple perspectives in pursuit of functional compromise. Please forgive any ignorance and consider the greater relevance if any of this is pertinent to you. Thank you.

Politics

1) Gun control is a necessity. "Control" does not mean the wholesale abolition of guns; it just means the regulation thereof. If you're a law-abiding citizen who has filed paperwork for taxes, vehicle and/or driver registration, healthcare, unemployment, or welfare, you're already familiar with a process similar to the one that would likely accompany owning and registering a weapon with the federal government. While I can't provide a 100% guarantee that this is exactly what would happen, the search and seizure of property in people's homes would violate other rights, thus making a paperwork pipeline a more feasible tact than an already overwhelmed police force coming into your home to confiscate a weapon.

1b) HOWEVER, I firmly believe assault weapons should be banned to the general public. I wholly support our right to bear arms as it was drafted and initially amended in eras that could not conceive of easily portable automatic weaponry within the military, much less outside of it. I've always understood that the purpose of this right was to grant our public the capability to defend itself against an encroaching military power in the direst of times; it was a contigency for if, or when, our military failed. Thus, the expectation was that the weapons available in the home would not be military grade, but intended for hunting and defense of personal property and repurposed only as a last resort.

Assault weapons were created to harm, if not kill, dozens at a time; if your personal property is being besieged by dozens, then odds are not in your favor already. If you cannot stop intruders with six to eight shots, again, the odds are likely not in your favor from the outset. So, at this point, I cannot understand the presence of assault weaponry in a public market. Again, it's unlikely that the government would waste already strained police or martial resources to remove weapons from your home; but, it would be nice to see an incentive program, similar to green initiative measures, for those who voluntarily "donate" their automatic weapons to local armories.

2) For all the rights we fear are being violated, the one that's bothered me most in the past year is our government's failure to abide by "BY the people." While the phrase comes from Lincoln's Gettysburg Address, it reflects a fundamental component of the founding of our country: the need for accurate and functional representation in our government. The majority of public response to Parkland was not to arm teachers. Giving more guns to more untrained citizens (particularly those already considered overtaxed in their field) is not an idea that immediately appeals to common sense or Occam's Razor, especially to a voting population familiar with Sandy Hook, Columbine, or the origins of the phrase "going postal." In this instance, government legislation is clearly failing to represent a very vocal majority.

A similar failure applies to recent environmental issues, too, with the government ignoring our extremely prolific academic and scientific communities. These communities not only establish vital conclusions for our nation, but are integral contributors to and frequently supported by the global community as it tackles environmental concerns. Our government is failing to listen to the majority of our country's scientific revolutionaries and innovators, our Einsteins, Curies, and Edisons.

3) We should not have to threaten our government, passively or otherwise, for it to listen to us and function. The size and frequency of recent marches recalls scenes from Vietnam and the Civil Rights Movement. Change is difficult; but, I would hope that we, as a society, are past the need for the backlash of dogs and firehoses, for our children to die in droves for the government's vanity, in order to instigate change. We have not yet been robbed of the right to peacefully congregate, and we will continue doing so until change happens.

4) Before questioning the influence of any media on violence, can we talk about gun ranges and a culture that, despite claiming to be peaceful and friendly, promotes weapons training as a pastime? I don't believe in eliminating gun ranges because, if you own a gun, I certainly want you to have practice and confidence in wielding it; however, I do support and applaud ranges that have stricter age policies and refuse to carry assault weapons. Such businesses acknowledge they're part of the problem and endeavor to be part of a long-term solution.

5) Immigrants and foreign tourists contribute to the base economy more than they detract from it. America's history of innovation is rooted in immigrant cultures. America's diversity, diplomacy, charisma, and appeal is persistently demonstrated by its welcoming and ethnically proud native cultures. Our continental neighbors are both inspirations and reflections of cultures and global issues from which we're often isolated. All of these form a context in which domestic businesses have the potential to grow, particularly if they're open to cooperating with the diversity of communities. However, the current government is inclined to provide more benefits to larger corporations that often outsource jobs to their convenience, not that of their local community or customers. In addition, the curtailing of immigrant prospects and foreign investors devastates small business access to skilled labor and broader capital.

For those concerned about immigrants taking their jobs, I suggest talking to CEOs who persist in outsourcing their customer service and production--Immigrants aren't taking your jobs; corporations are giving them away to other countries. That said, I support full business deployment (storefront + infrastructure) in floundering economies with pay concurrent to labor rather than the exploitation of a weak market. A skilled and wealthy middle class do a lot for an economy, including perpetuating it beyond political discord and catastrophic financial disaster in the highest tiers .

Spoils of Lore

1) I want to write, but I have no time even when I have time. The short of it: When people haven't been making demands on my time, whether it's my job or social obligations, I've been in mourning (I've lost two friends/mentors and a family member in the last four months). I spend most of my personal time trying to catch up on sleep or trying to figure out my career situation because I'd like to attain both by the end of the year.

2) When I do get to SoL, the majority of posts will be regarding 2016-2017 games because of my backlog. Currently Far Cry 5 is out, and I hope to take a look at that eventually; but, anything 2018 will probably not pop up on the roster until summer.

3) I know the Tumblr blog template needs updating. It's an ugly, hot mess, and I apologize!

4) Finally and most importantly, thank you to everyone who follows and supports SoL. You're a quirky, wicked smart bunch who inspire me to keep writing in the hopes of one day getting on your level, bro~ Thank you!

#politics #america #gun control #gaming #spoils of lore #status update

1 note · View note

mayarosa47 · 5 years ago

Text

Foreclosure Lawyer Draper Utah

Credit for individuals has been in use—and regulated—since the earliest days of recorded antiquity, and probably well before that. Credit regulation began at least with the laws of ancient India and Babylon, but it probably started much earlier with nomadic hunter-gatherer chieftains who desired to straighten out borrowing and lending misunderstandings and abuses among clan and tribe members. In the United States, credit regulation began in the colonial period with the adoption of England’s legal system, and it continued after the American Revolution, expanding its geographic reach with the westward migration of settlers.

Throughout American financial history through World War II, mortgage and consumer credit was often hard to obtain, but since 1945, the amount of outstanding credit subject to regulation has taken on massive proportions. Interestingly, however, the postwar growth of credit has not been nearly as large as is often believed when measured in real (inflation-adjusted) terms. It is reasonable to assume that a complete return to a peacetime economy, occurred by 1955 following the Korean War. Calculating real compound annual growth rates from that year to 2008, mortgage credit grew 5.2 percent annually and consumer credit 3.9 percent. Both amounts actually declined in 2009.

If you are facing foreclosure, you may be a victim of predatory lending. Speak to an experienced Draper Utah foreclosure lawyer. Like TILA, HOEPA has proven to be a relatively ineffective tool for controlling predatory lending. The vast majority of subprime loans do not meet the definition of “high-cost,” and therefore are not subject to any of HOEPA’s protections or prohibitions. HOEPA excludes some questionable costs—such as high prepayment penalties—from its points and fees threshold, and does not cover purchase money mortgages, reverse mortgages, or home equity lines of credit.

In addition, although HOEPA bans some predatory practices for covered loans, its prohibitions are either too limited or too onerous to provide adequate protection for borrowers. HOEPA, for example, appears to recognize that asset-based lending is abusive, but applies only when there is a “pattern or practice” of asset-based lending, and not when a lender fails to consider the plaintiff’s ability to pay in any one instance. HOEPA thus insulates from prosecution all but the worst asset-based lenders. In short, although HOEPA targets the worst loans, it has not been able to stem the rise in abusive lending practices.

Real Estate Settlement Procedures Act (RESPA)

The Real Estate Settlement Procedures Act (RESPA) ensures that borrowers obtain basic information about their loan during the transaction, prohibits certain practices that may increase settlement costs, and imposes certain requirements on loan servicing practices. RESPA applies to “federally related mortgage loans” secured with a mortgage on a one-to-four family residential property, which includes most home purchase loans, assumptions, refinances, home improvement loans, and equity lines of credit.

RESPA requires that lenders detail the costs associated with settlement, outline lender servicing and escrow account practices, and disclose any business relationships between settlement service providers. RESPA also prohibits certain potentially predatory practices that could increase settlement costs to the borrower. For example, RESPA makes it illegal to give or accept any item of value for referrals of settlement services or to give or accept charges for services not actually performed.

Finally, RESPA requires loan servicers to follow certain practices related to the servicing of the loan and any escrow account used for paying property taxes, insurance, and the like. Servicers must respond to the borrower’s written questions or complaints about servicing of the loan within 60 days, and must provide the borrower advance written notice before servicing of the loan is transferred to a new servicer. Although RESPA does not require lenders or servicers to maintain escrow accounts, where such an account is maintained, RESPA places limits on the amount of money the servicer may require the borrower to pay into the account, and requires that the servicer make payments on time to avoid late charges. As important as these protections may be, RESPA’s reach is limited. Although some of its provisions create an explicit federal cause of action, thus allowing borrowers to file private suits, others (including some of the disclosure provisions) do not. Furthermore, disclosures offer only partial protection, for the simple reason that many borrowers do not understand the content of the notices they are given. In addition, settlement costs and servicing practices—while they can be unfair and abusive—are not the primary methods by which predatory lenders strip equity from their victims. Thus, for a predatory loan victim like Mary, who is in need of a statute that will offer her meaningful protection and relief, RESPA presents many of the same practical shortcomings as TILA and HOEPA.

Equal Credit Opportunity Act (ECOA) and Fair Housing Act (FHA)

Predatory lenders are by no means even-handed in where they ply their trade and whom they choose to target with their fraudulent practices. Often these lenders focus their exploitative practices on traditionally underserved populations where minorities, women, and the elderly are disproportionately represented. This practice, known as “reverse redlining”—defined as marketing bad loans to an area because it is home to members of a certain racial, ethnic, or other group protected under the law—is a civil rights issue, because it causes significant harm to minority communities in particular.

Like traditional redlining—the practice of denying prime or good loans to a minority area or community—reverse redlining has, in recent years, been held to violate both the Fair Housing Act (FHA) and the Equal Credit Opportunity Act (ECOA). Where these two laws can be used to combat predatory lending practices, the effect may be considerable, in large part due to the extraordinary range of remedies and procedural options these statutes offer.

In the broadest sense, the FHA and ECOA prohibit discrimination in the extension of credit and real estate-related transactions (defined to include mortgage lending). Both statutes permit recovery of compensatory damages (that is, money to make a victim whole for the injury suffered), punitive damages, and attorneys’ fees, in addition to “injunctive relief” (a legal term for nonfinancial steps that the court can order to right the wrong done or to prevent future harm). The FHA, in particular, provides a far more generous statute of limitations than most other federal statutes, and grants an automatic right to a jury trial. In addition, both the FHA and ECOA permit a finding of liability not just where discrimination is intentional, but also where a lending practice has an unnecessary disparate impact (a disproportionately negative effect) on a protected group. Given the right facts and a receptive court, these are powerful tools—far more effective than anything offered by TILA, HOEPA, or RESPA.

For all that these statutes offer, however, they also pose problems for those seeking to prosecute predatory lenders. First, the FHA and ECOA were designed to provide a remedy for discriminatory conduct—that is, conduct that treats protected groups differently from nonprotected groups. To prevail under these statutes, it is not enough to show that a lender subjected an individual to unfair or fraudulent practices; the victim must prove that she was subjected to the practices because of her race (or some other protected characteristic). That means, of course, that “equal opportunity” predatory lenders—those who prey equally, for example, on white and African American communities, young and old, men and women—may fall outside the reach of these laws.

Second, even where a lender has engaged in discrimination, it is not always easy to prove, especially for an individual without significant time and resources. For example, proof of discriminatory marketing usually requires evidence of how a lender treats a larger group of borrowers within a metropolitan community. An individual victim facing foreclosure may well lack the time or resources to marshal this kind of evidence or otherwise build a winning FHA or ECOA case.

Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act (RICO)

Although enacted to target organized crime, the Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act (RICO) has been used to combat various forms of consumer abuse.36 RICO authorizes civil suits by individuals who have been injured by certain criminal activity known as “racketeering,” including mail or wire fraud. RICO prohibits persons employed by or associated with an “enterprise” (which may be a corporation or other legal entity, or an informal association of individuals) from using the enterprise to engage in a pattern of racketeering activity.

Predatory lending frequently involves mail or wire fraud. This has allowed creative attorneys to assert RICO claims against lenders engaged in abusive practices. The remedies offered under RICO make it a potentially powerful legal weapon: where a borrower succeeds in proving a RICO violation, he or she may collect treble damages (three times the damages actually suffered) and attorneys’ fees and costs, which may be substantial. Courts have interpreted RICO broadly, to cover many different types of illegal schemes, with the result that the statute offers the potential to reach a wide range of predatory lending practices. RICO’s prohibition on conspiracy to violate its provisions also opens the door to claims against third parties (such as brokers) that may have assisted the lender in implementing the predatory scheme.

Despite the protections and relief available under RICO, its utility in the arena of predatory lending has limitations. First, RICO requires proof of far more than abusive loan practices. In general, proving the complex elements of a RICO claim is difficult and costly, and there is considerable disagreement among the courts regarding the proof required to establish a RICO violation.

Second, certain requirements of a RICO claim can be particularly difficult to meet in a predatory lending case. For example, “racketeering activity” usually requires proof of fraud, which as a legal matter can be difficult to show. RICO also requires proof of a “pattern” of racketeering activity, which means that an individual like Mary, who may be victimized through a single instance of illegal conduct, cannot take advantage of RICO’s protections. And even where such a pattern of illegal activity exists, it may be difficult to establish the existence of an “enterprise” through which the illegal activity was conducted.

Finally, although RICO offers significant monetary remedies, the statute leaves some remedial gaps. It is unclear, for example, whether RICO authorizes injunctive relief. Thus, even where a borrower wins a RICO action, the court may not be able to order the lender to cease its predatory practices or to require forgiveness of the loan.

The Federal Trade Commission Act

Section 5 of the Federal Trade Commission Act prohibits unfair or deceptive trade practices. An “unfair” practice is one that causes or is likely to cause consumers “substantial injury” that is not reasonably avoidable and is not outweighed by countervailing consumer benefits. A “deceptive” practice is a material representation, omission, or practice that is likely to deceive consumers acting reasonably under the circumstances. The FTC Act’s broad prohibition against unfair or deceptive practices has been applied to a wide range of actions, including abusive lending and loan servicing practices.

The FTC Act grants the FTC authority to bring administrative and judicial enforcement actions to attack unfair or deceptive practices by individuals, partnerships, or corporations, with certain exceptions (including banks that are regulated by other federal agencies). In the administrative context, the FTC issues a complaint and conducts its own investigation. Where it concludes that an individual or entity has engaged in illegal practices, the FTC may issue a cease-and-desist order to halt the illegal activity, and may then seek consumer redress in federal court for consumer injury. The FTC may also pursue other individuals or entities that knowingly violate the standards in a particular cease-and-desist order by suing in federal court to recover civil penalties.

Independent of its own administrative process, the FTC also has the power to challenge unfair or deceptive trade practices by filing a lawsuit directly in federal court, without first making a finding of illegal conduct. Under Section 13(b) of the FTC Act, the FTC may sue in federal court when it believes that the statute has been, or is about to be, violated. The court may issue an order prohibiting the illegal practices or requiring certain action, and also may award restitution and rescission of contracts.

Where the FTC has chosen to exercise its enforcement power to attack predatory lending practices, it often has been very effective. The FTC Act’s ultimate effect on predatory lending is limited, however. The FTC Act does not authorize lawsuits by individual consumers; only the FTC (and other agencies, in the case of some banks) can pursue potential violations of the law. Enforcement is therefore constrained significantly by practical considerations facing the FTC or any other agency, including political pressure and scarce resources. Although the FTC may be able to use its limited resources to prosecute some egregious instances of predatory lending involving a widespread pattern of predatory practices, only a small fraction of individual victims obtains relief under the FTC Act, and the vast majority of predatory lenders escape its reach. Thus, a borrower like Mary would be unlikely to be the beneficiary of relief from the FTC unless Acme’s practices were sufficiently egregious that the company independently had come to the attention of the agency’s investigators, or sufficient numbers of complaints had already found their way to the FTC to warrant a decision by the Commission to invest the agency’s resources in an enforcement action. In practice, the FTC is simply not a reliable source of redress for the average abused borrower.

Proving that your lender has violated the laws is a complex process. It is best left to an experienced Draper Utah foreclosure lawyer.

Draper Utah Foreclosure Lawyer Free Consultation

When you need legal help from a Draper Utah Foreclosure Attorney, please call Ascent Law LLC for your free consultation (801) 676-5506. We want to help you.

Ascent Law LLC 8833 S. Redwood Road, Suite C West Jordan, Utah 84088 United States Telephone: (801) 676-5506

Ascent Law LLC

4.9 stars – based on 67 reviews

Recent Posts

What Happens When You Go To Court For A DUI In Utah?

If I File Bankruptcy Will I Lose My Property?

Coping With Psychological Damage After An Accident

Contract Termination

ATV Accident Lawyer North Salt Lake Utah

What Is The Difference Between Annulment And Legal Separation?

from https://www.ascentlawfirm.com/foreclosure-lawyer-draper-utah/

from Criminal Defense Lawyer West Jordan Utah - Blog http://criminaldefenselawyerwestjordanutah.weebly.com/blog/foreclosure-lawyer-draper-utah

0 notes

advertphoto · 5 years ago

Text

Foreclosure Lawyer Draper Utah

youtube

Real Estate Settlement Procedures Act (RESPA)

youtube

Equal Credit Opportunity Act (ECOA) and Fair Housing Act (FHA)

youtube

Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act (RICO)

The Federal Trade Commission Act

Proving that your lender has violated the laws is a complex process. It is best left to an experienced Draper Utah foreclosure lawyer.

Draper Utah Foreclosure Lawyer Free Consultation

When you need legal help from a Draper Utah Foreclosure Attorney, please call Ascent Law LLC for your free consultation (801) 676-5506. We want to help you.

Ascent Law LLC 8833 S. Redwood Road, Suite C West Jordan, Utah 84088 United States Telephone: (801) 676-5506

Ascent Law LLC

4.9 stars – based on 67 reviews

Recent Posts

What Happens When You Go To Court For A DUI In Utah?

If I File Bankruptcy Will I Lose My Property?

Coping With Psychological Damage After An Accident

Contract Termination

ATV Accident Lawyer North Salt Lake Utah

What Is The Difference Between Annulment And Legal Separation?

Source: https://www.ascentlawfirm.com/foreclosure-lawyer-draper-utah/

0 notes

michaeljames1221 · 5 years ago

Text

Foreclosure Lawyer Draper Utah

youtube

Real Estate Settlement Procedures Act (RESPA)

youtube

Equal Credit Opportunity Act (ECOA) and Fair Housing Act (FHA)

youtube

Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act (RICO)

The Federal Trade Commission Act

Proving that your lender has violated the laws is a complex process. It is best left to an experienced Draper Utah foreclosure lawyer.

Draper Utah Foreclosure Lawyer Free Consultation

When you need legal help from a Draper Utah Foreclosure Attorney, please call Ascent Law LLC for your free consultation (801) 676-5506. We want to help you.

Ascent Law LLC 8833 S. Redwood Road, Suite C West Jordan, Utah 84088 United States Telephone: (801) 676-5506

Ascent Law LLC

4.9 stars – based on 67 reviews

Recent Posts

What Happens When You Go To Court For A DUI In Utah?

If I File Bankruptcy Will I Lose My Property?

Coping With Psychological Damage After An Accident

Contract Termination

ATV Accident Lawyer North Salt Lake Utah

What Is The Difference Between Annulment And Legal Separation?

from Michael Anderson https://www.ascentlawfirm.com/foreclosure-lawyer-draper-utah/

from Criminal Defense Lawyer West Jordan Utah https://criminaldefenselawyerwestjordanutah.wordpress.com/2020/04/11/foreclosure-lawyer-draper-utah/

0 notes

aretia · 5 years ago

Text

Foreclosure Lawyer Draper Utah

youtube

Real Estate Settlement Procedures Act (RESPA)

youtube

Equal Credit Opportunity Act (ECOA) and Fair Housing Act (FHA)

youtube

Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act (RICO)

The Federal Trade Commission Act

Proving that your lender has violated the laws is a complex process. It is best left to an experienced Draper Utah foreclosure lawyer.

Draper Utah Foreclosure Lawyer Free Consultation

When you need legal help from a Draper Utah Foreclosure Attorney, please call Ascent Law LLC for your free consultation (801) 676-5506. We want to help you.

Ascent Law LLC 8833 S. Redwood Road, Suite C West Jordan, Utah 84088 United States Telephone: (801) 676-5506

Ascent Law LLC

4.9 stars – based on 67 reviews

Recent Posts

What Happens When You Go To Court For A DUI In Utah?

If I File Bankruptcy Will I Lose My Property?

Coping With Psychological Damage After An Accident

Contract Termination

ATV Accident Lawyer North Salt Lake Utah

What Is The Difference Between Annulment And Legal Separation?

Source: https://www.ascentlawfirm.com/foreclosure-lawyer-draper-utah/

0 notes

gonnagoandrunwiththehorses · 5 years ago

Text

Foreclosure Lawyer Draper Utah

youtube

Real Estate Settlement Procedures Act (RESPA)

youtube

Equal Credit Opportunity Act (ECOA) and Fair Housing Act (FHA)

youtube

Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act (RICO)

The Federal Trade Commission Act

Proving that your lender has violated the laws is a complex process. It is best left to an experienced Draper Utah foreclosure lawyer.

Draper Utah Foreclosure Lawyer Free Consultation

When you need legal help from a Draper Utah Foreclosure Attorney, please call Ascent Law LLC for your free consultation (801) 676-5506. We want to help you.

Ascent Law LLC 8833 S. Redwood Road, Suite C West Jordan, Utah 84088 United States Telephone: (801) 676-5506

Ascent Law LLC

4.9 stars – based on 67 reviews

Recent Posts

What Happens When You Go To Court For A DUI In Utah?

If I File Bankruptcy Will I Lose My Property?

Coping With Psychological Damage After An Accident

Contract Termination

ATV Accident Lawyer North Salt Lake Utah

What Is The Difference Between Annulment And Legal Separation?

Source: https://www.ascentlawfirm.com/foreclosure-lawyer-draper-utah/

0 notes

coming-from-hell · 5 years ago

Text

Foreclosure Lawyer Draper Utah

youtube

Real Estate Settlement Procedures Act (RESPA)

youtube

Equal Credit Opportunity Act (ECOA) and Fair Housing Act (FHA)

youtube

Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act (RICO)

The Federal Trade Commission Act

Proving that your lender has violated the laws is a complex process. It is best left to an experienced Draper Utah foreclosure lawyer.

Draper Utah Foreclosure Lawyer Free Consultation

When you need legal help from a Draper Utah Foreclosure Attorney, please call Ascent Law LLC for your free consultation (801) 676-5506. We want to help you.

Ascent Law LLC 8833 S. Redwood Road, Suite C West Jordan, Utah 84088 United States Telephone: (801) 676-5506

Ascent Law LLC

4.9 stars – based on 67 reviews

Recent Posts

What Happens When You Go To Court For A DUI In Utah?

If I File Bankruptcy Will I Lose My Property?

Coping With Psychological Damage After An Accident

Contract Termination

ATV Accident Lawyer North Salt Lake Utah

What Is The Difference Between Annulment And Legal Separation?

Source: https://www.ascentlawfirm.com/foreclosure-lawyer-draper-utah/

0 notes

divorcelawyergunnisonutah · 5 years ago

Text

Foreclosure Lawyer Draper Utah

youtube

Real Estate Settlement Procedures Act (RESPA)

youtube

Equal Credit Opportunity Act (ECOA) and Fair Housing Act (FHA)

youtube

Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act (RICO)

The Federal Trade Commission Act

Proving that your lender has violated the laws is a complex process. It is best left to an experienced Draper Utah foreclosure lawyer.

Draper Utah Foreclosure Lawyer Free Consultation

When you need legal help from a Draper Utah Foreclosure Attorney, please call Ascent Law LLC for your free consultation (801) 676-5506. We want to help you.

Ascent Law LLC 8833 S. Redwood Road, Suite C West Jordan, Utah 84088 United States Telephone: (801) 676-5506

Ascent Law LLC

4.9 stars – based on 67 reviews

Recent Posts

What Happens When You Go To Court For A DUI In Utah?

If I File Bankruptcy Will I Lose My Property?

Coping With Psychological Damage After An Accident

Contract Termination

ATV Accident Lawyer North Salt Lake Utah

What Is The Difference Between Annulment And Legal Separation?

from Michael Anderson https://www.ascentlawfirm.com/foreclosure-lawyer-draper-utah/

0 notes

melissawalker01 · 5 years ago

Text

Foreclosure Lawyer Draper Utah

youtube

Real Estate Settlement Procedures Act (RESPA)

youtube

Equal Credit Opportunity Act (ECOA) and Fair Housing Act (FHA)

youtube

Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act (RICO)

The Federal Trade Commission Act

Proving that your lender has violated the laws is a complex process. It is best left to an experienced Draper Utah foreclosure lawyer.

Draper Utah Foreclosure Lawyer Free Consultation

When you need legal help from a Draper Utah Foreclosure Attorney, please call Ascent Law LLC for your free consultation (801) 676-5506. We want to help you.

Ascent Law LLC 8833 S. Redwood Road, Suite C West Jordan, Utah 84088 United States Telephone: (801) 676-5506

Ascent Law LLC

4.9 stars – based on 67 reviews

Recent Posts

What Happens When You Go To Court For A DUI In Utah?

If I File Bankruptcy Will I Lose My Property?

Coping With Psychological Damage After An Accident

Contract Termination

ATV Accident Lawyer North Salt Lake Utah

What Is The Difference Between Annulment And Legal Separation?

from Michael Anderson https://www.ascentlawfirm.com/foreclosure-lawyer-draper-utah/ from Divorce Lawyer Nelson Farms Utah https://divorcelawyernelsonfarmsutah.tumblr.com/post/615066981682626560

0 notes

asafeatherwould · 5 years ago

Text

Foreclosure Lawyer Draper Utah

youtube

Real Estate Settlement Procedures Act (RESPA)

youtube

Equal Credit Opportunity Act (ECOA) and Fair Housing Act (FHA)

youtube

Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act (RICO)

The Federal Trade Commission Act

Proving that your lender has violated the laws is a complex process. It is best left to an experienced Draper Utah foreclosure lawyer.

Draper Utah Foreclosure Lawyer Free Consultation

When you need legal help from a Draper Utah Foreclosure Attorney, please call Ascent Law LLC for your free consultation (801) 676-5506. We want to help you.

Ascent Law LLC 8833 S. Redwood Road, Suite C West Jordan, Utah 84088 United States Telephone: (801) 676-5506

Ascent Law LLC

4.9 stars – based on 67 reviews

Recent Posts

What Happens When You Go To Court For A DUI In Utah?

If I File Bankruptcy Will I Lose My Property?

Coping With Psychological Damage After An Accident

Contract Termination

ATV Accident Lawyer North Salt Lake Utah

What Is The Difference Between Annulment And Legal Separation?

Source: https://www.ascentlawfirm.com/foreclosure-lawyer-draper-utah/

0 notes

christheodore-live · 6 years ago

Text

The Permanent Lie, Our Deadliest Threat

The most ominous danger we face does not come from the eradication of free speech through the obliteration of net neutrality or through Google algorithms that steer people away from dissident, left-wing, progressive or anti-war sites. It does not come from a tax bill that abandons all pretense of fiscal responsibility to enrich corporations and oligarchs and prepares the way to dismantle programs such as Social Security. It does not come from the opening of public land to the mining and fossil fuel industry, the acceleration of ecocide by demolishing environmental regulations, or the destruction of public education. It does not come from the squandering of federal dollars on a bloated military as the country collapses or the use of the systems of domestic security to criminalize dissent. The most ominous danger we face comes from the marginalization and destruction of institutions, including the courts, academia, legislative bodies, cultural organizations and the press, that once ensured that civil discourse was rooted in reality and fact, helped us distinguish lies from truth and facilitated justice.

Donald Trump and today’s Republican Party represent the last stage in the emergence of corporate totalitarianism. Pillage and oppression are justified by the permanent lie. The permanent lie is different from the falsehoods and half-truths uttered by politicians such as Bill Clinton, George W. Bush and Barack Obama. The common political lie these politicians employed was not designed to cancel out reality. It was a form of manipulation. Clinton, when he signed into law the North American Free Trade Agreement, promised “NAFTA means jobs, American jobs and good-paying American jobs.” George W. Bush justified the invasion of Iraq because Saddam Hussein supposedly possessed weapons of mass destruction. But Clinton did not continue to pretend that NAFTA was beneficial to the working class when reality proved otherwise. Bush did not pretend that Iraq had weapons of mass destruction once none were found.

The permanent lie is not circumscribed by reality. It is perpetuated even in the face of overwhelming evidence that discredits it. It is irrational. Those who speak in the language of truth and fact are attacked as liars, traitors and purveyors of “fake news.” They are banished from the public sphere once totalitarian elites accrue sufficient power, a power now granted to them with the revoking of net neutrality. The iron refusal by those who engage in the permanent lie to acknowledge reality, no matter how transparent reality becomes, creates a collective psychosis.

“The result of a consistent and total substitution of lies for factual truth is not that the lie will now be accepted as truth and truth be defamed as a lie, but that the sense by which we take our bearings in the real world—and the category of truth versus falsehood is among the mental means to this end—is being destroyed,” Hannah Arendt wrote in “The Origins of Totalitarianism.”

The permanent lie turns political discourse into absurdist theater. Donald Trump, who lies about the size of his inauguration crowd despite photographic evidence, insists that in regard to his personal finances he is “going to get killed” by a tax bill that actually will save him and his heirs over $1 billion. Treasury Secretary Steven Mnuchin claims he has a report that proves that the tax cuts will pay for themselves and will not increase the deficit—only there never was a report. Sen. John Cornyn assures us, countering all factual evidence, that “this is not a bill that is designed primarily to benefit the wealthy and the large businesses.”

Two million acres of public land, meanwhile, are handed over to the mining and fossil fuel industry as Trump insists the transfer means that “public lands will once again be for public use.” When environmentalists denounce the transfer as a theft, Rep. Rob Bishop calls their criticism “a false narrative.”

FCC Chairman Ajit Pai, after ending net neutrality, effectively killing free speech on the internet, says, “[T]hose who��ve said the internet as we know it is about to end have been proven wrong. …We have a free internet going forward.” And at the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, phrases such as “evidence-based” and “science-based” are banned.

The permanent lie is the apotheosis of totalitarianism. It no longer matters what is true. It matters only what is “correct.” Federal courts are being stacked with imbecilic and incompetent judges who serve the “correct” ideology of corporatism and the rigid social mores of the Christian right. They hold reality, including science and the rule of law, in contempt. They seek to banish those who live in a reality-based world defined by intellectual and moral autonomy. Totalitarian rule always elevates the brutal and the stupid. These reigning idiots have no genuine political philosophy or goals. They use clichés and slogans, most of which are absurd and contradictory, to justify their greed and lust for power. This is as true on the Christian right, which is filling the ideological vacuum of the Trump administration, as it is for the corporatists that preach neoliberalism and globalization. The merger of the corporatists with the Christian right is the marrying of Godzilla to Frankenstein.

“The venal political figures need not even comprehend the social and political consequences of their behavior,” psychiatrist Joost A.M. Meerloo wrote in “The Rape of the Mind: The Psychology of Thought Control, Menticide, and Brainwashing.” “They are compelled not by ideological belief, no matter how much they may rationalize to convince themselves they are, but by the distortions of their own personalities. They are not motivated by their advertised urge to serve their country or mankind, but rather by an overwhelming need and compulsion to satisfy the cravings of their own pathological character structures. The ideologies they spout are not real goals; they are the cynical devices by which these sick men hope to achieve some personal sense of worth and power. Subtle inner lies seduce them into going from bad to worse. Defensive self-deception, arrested insight, evasion of emotional identification with others, degradation of empathy—the mind has many defense mechanisms with which to blind the conscience.”

When reality is replaced by the whims of opinion and expediency, what is true one day often becomes false the next. Consistency is discarded. Complexity, nuance, depth and profundity are replaced with the simpleton’s belief in threats and force. This is why the Trump administration disdains diplomacy and is dynamiting the State Department. Totalitarianism, wrote novelist and social critic Thomas Mann, is at its core the desire for a simple folktale. Once this folktale replaces reality, morality and ethics are abolished.

“Those who can make you believe absurdities can make you commit atrocities,” Voltaire warned.

The corporate elites, who even in the best of times stacked the deck against people of color, the poor and the working class, no longer play by any rules. Their lobbyists, bought-and-paid-for politicians, pliant academics, corrupt judges and television news celebrities run a kleptocratic state defined by legalized bribery and unchecked exploitation. The corporate elites write laws, regulations and bills to expand corporate looting and plunder while imposing a crippling debt peonage on the public, including college graduates burdened by huge loans. They ram through austerity measures that dismantle state and municipal services, often forcing them to be sold off to corporations, and slash social programs, including public education and health care. They insist, however, that when we have grievances we rely on the institutions they have debased and corrupted. They ask us to invest our energy and time in fixed political campaigns, petition elected representatives or appeal to the courts. They seek to lure us into their schizophrenic world, where rational discourse is pitted against gibberish. They demand we seek justice in a system designed to perpetuate injustice. It is a game we can never win.

“Thus all our dignity consist in thought,” wrote Pascal. “It is on thought that we must depend for our recovery, not on space and time, which we could never fill. Let us then strive to think well; that is the basic principle of morality.”

We must pit power against power. We must build parallel institutions and organizations that protect us from corporate assault and resist corporate domination. We must sever ourselves as much as possible from the vampire state. The more we can create self-contained communities, with our own currencies and infrastructures, the more we can starve and cripple the corporate beast. This means establishing worker-run cooperatives, local systems of food supply based on a vegan diet and independent artistic, cultural and political organizations. It means obstructing in every way possible the corporate assault, including the blocking of pipelines and fracking sites, and taking to the streets in sustained acts of civil disobedience against censorship and the attack on civil liberties. And it means creating sanctuary cities. All of this will have to be done the way it has always been done, by building personal, face-to-face relationships. We may not ultimately save ourselves, especially with the refusal by the elites to address the ravages of climate change, but we can create pods of resistance where truth, beauty, empathy and justice endure.

Chris Hedges is a Pulitzer Prize-winning journalist, New York Times best selling author, former professor at Princeton University, activist and ordained Presbyterian minister.

0 notes

christophertheodore-org · 6 years ago

Text

The Permanent Lie, Our Deadliest Threat

FCC Chairman Ajit Pai, after ending net neutrality, effectively killing free speech on the internet, says, “[T]hose who’ve said the internet as we know it is about to end have been proven wrong. …We have a free internet going forward.” And at the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, phrases such as “evidence-based” and “science-based” are banned.

“Those who can make you believe absurdities can make you commit atrocities,” Voltaire warned.

Chris Hedges is a Pulitzer Prize-winning journalist, New York Times best selling author, former professor at Princeton University, activist and ordained Presbyterian minister.

0 notes

christophertheodore-net · 7 years ago

Text

The Permanent Lie, Our Deadliest Threat

“Those who can make you believe absurdities can make you commit atrocities,” Voltaire warned.

Chris Hedges is a Pulitzer Prize-winning journalist, New York Times best selling author, former professor at Princeton University, activist and ordained Presbyterian minister.

0 notes

christheodore · 7 years ago

Photo

The Permanent Lie, Our Deadliest Threat

By Chris Hedges

“Those who can make you believe absurdities can make you commit atrocities,” Voltaire warned.

Chris Hedges is a Pulitzer Prize-winning journalist, New York Times best selling author, former professor at Princeton University, activist and ordained Presbyterian minister.

0 notes

newstfionline · 7 years ago

Text

The World Is Asking If Cash Will Disappear—But Should It?

Bertille Bayart, Le Figaro, June 29, 2017

PARIS--Will the digital revolution get the better of physical currencies, a cornerstone of trade since 700 B.C. and a key fixture of modern society and government? Whether using cards, transfers, or cellphones, paying for things is increasingly done without coins or bills. This evolution raises the prospect of a cashless society. But is that really what we want?

Cash disappears from our daily lives a little more each day. Long gone are the cash registers that used to line bank counters. They were replaced by ATMs, but there are now fewer of those too. The amount of cash we withdraw is also decreasing, down -1.1% in France last year. Meanwhile, the alternatives to cash are growing rapidly--up more than 10% globally in 2015--according to the consulting firm Capgemini.

“The dematerialization of payments is a spectacular rising tide,” explains Gilles Grapinet, CEO of Worldline.

In France, half of payments are made with a banking card, with a volume of transactions that has been growing on average 8% every year since 2000. The more recent rise of contactless payment accelerates the trend. “The average amount paid by card decreases steadily as it challenges cash, historically the preferred method for small payments,” explains Christophe Vergne, head of card payments and practices at Capgemini Global Financial Services.

Still, cash is putting up a fight, even in developed countries. “Cash isn’t going to disappear,” says Delphine Lalanne, who heads fiduciary activities at the Bank of France. The volume of bills in Europe rules in her favor. In 2016 in France, it went up 7% in quantity and 6% in value. Money--as in the kind you can hold, feel and smell--still has it!

“The French and the Europeans are still very much attached to cash,” says Lalanne. “Some predict its extinction, but let’s not forget that it’s the customers, the users, who are king and define the method of payment best suited to them. A European survey that the European Central Bank will be publishing in the summer shows that three times out of four, in local shops, people prefer to pay cash.”

There’s a trust factor when it comes to cash. “It remains the only payment method that has an instantaneous, universal liberating power. It’s the legacy of the Prince’s privilege to mint coins,” the Bank of France official explains. Being able to pay everywhere, in every circumstance, without any doubt about the value of your method of payment remains the real, or supposed, privilege of cash. Cash reassures people.

In 2008, after the collapse of Lehman Brothers on Sept. 15, demand for euro bills went up by an additional 38 billion euros between late September and late October. “We took part in a simulation of a flood in Paris. And together with feedback from natural disasters from abroad--Fukushima, for instance--we know that we’d face a surge in the demand for cash, especially if technological and electrical infrastructures are affected,” says Lalanne.

But printing, handling and secure transportation of cash are costly--representing between 0.29% and 0.72% of GDP, according to a 2011 study by Denmark’s central bank. There’s also the fact that cash is a vehicle for fraud, tax evasion, grey or black market, corruption, but also organized crime and even terrorism financing.

One thing’s for certain: Large denomination bills have a tendency to vanish. The 500-euro note is a case in point. We hardly ever encounter them. And yet, there were 269 billion euros worth of them in circulation as the end of 2016. They’re generally used as hoard money, hidden underneath mattresses or inside safes. Others are used by crooked people or organization, and we don’t really know in what proportions. What we do know is that more than 30% of the euros in circulation (in value) are outside of the euro zone.

The innovation in payment methods--from the good old debit card to paying with your smartphone--operates hand-in-hand with the ongoing commerce revolution. “In the digital era, retailers are reinventing the customer experience to make it as smooth as possible,” Gilles Grapinet explains. “And in that respect, cash reveals its fundamental limit: It cannot accompany the digital commerce revolution.”

The Worldline CEO calls the shift in commerce a “weapon of mass destruction” against cash. “We are killing the cash registers. And what are cash registers good for, except keeping cash?”

Digital payment versus cash is also a battle of two lobbies. “The extinction of cash is also a theory disseminated by pressure groups,” one expert notes. Digital payments, after all, aren’t free of charge. Their development implies a massification that generates commission payments from retailers. They also make it easier to collect commercially exploitable data, the equivalent of gold for the 21st century.

In addition, the modernization of payment methods allows for greater liquidity of the banking market and more competition, as it favors the emergence of new actors in a market where it can be difficult to make a name for oneself. The European Union, in that sense, plays the role of a stimulant.

“The new European directive on payment services (PSD2) will accelerate the replacement of cash by digital methods of payment,” says Christophe Vergne. “Some countries have declared war on cash. In Northern Europe, they did so to accompany the digital evolution of society. In some African countries, for security reasons. In India, to fight against corruption.”

Thus, the cashless society starts having its own supporters and theorists. The former IMF economist Kenneth Rogoff became one its advocates with his book The Curse Of Cash, published last year. The amount of cash in circulation represents $4,200 dollars per person in the United States, children included, he insists. A lot more than necessary for any honest human activity. So instead of reaching a full extinction of cash, he defends a cash degrowth, starting with the withdrawal of large-denomination bills.

The idea is gaining ground around the world. In the middle of last year, the European Central Bank initiated the trend by ending the printing of 500-euro bills--a controversial move. More importantly, in November 2016, India’s government abruptly declared invalid all bills of 500 and 1,000 rupees in an unprecedented and slightly chaotic operation. Six months later, it’s difficult to draw clear conclusions from this huge demonetization operation, the goal of which was to declare war on the grey economy and corruption. Others have turned to less spectacular measures, like imposing limits on cash transactions. In France, the cap was brought down from 3,000 euros to 1,000 euros in September 2015.

That being said, the image of briefcases and envelopes filled with money shouldn’t overshadow the other payment methods used by criminals, big or small. Transfers, offshore accounts, trusts, etc. the grey economy skillfully makes light of financial rules. And the increasing number of scams and blackmail hackers take advantage of the rise of alternative currencies such as Bitcoin. “The extinction of cash wouldn’t erase money-laundering, nor tax fraud,” Lalanne insists.

Monetary policy also plays a role in this debate. Ever since major central banks made a foray into the then unexplored territory of negative interest rates, cash has become an obstacle to the propagation of their policy. When it costs money to deposit money in a bank, users have an incentive to keep it at home. In Switzerland, the 1,000-franc bill became very popular after negative interest rates were introduced.

Sweden is a pioneer country when it comes to money. That’s where the first bank notes were invented and where the first national central bank was created, in the late 17th century. Sweden was also the first to introduce negative interest rates in 2015. And the Nordic country is ahead of the curve when it comes to cashless societies. Going cashless is a goal openly admitted by the authorities, so much so that they even promoted it on the state-run website Sweden.se.

The Swedes no longer pay, they “swish.” Swish is the name of a payment app launched by Swedish and Danish banks. And although ABBA sang “Money, Money, Money,” the museum dedicated to the Swedish band in Stockholm doesn’t accept any cash. Another piece of evidence of the willingness to switch is that any shopkeeper in Sweden has to right to refuse payments in cash. As a consequence, the volume of cash only represents 2.1% of the GDP in Sweden compared to 10.3% in the Eurozone and 7.7% in the U.S., according to Capgemini.

The Swedish example attracts much discussion in the world of payments. For some, it’s a full-scale showcase of the prospects of tomorrow’s digital world. For others, it raises serious concerns: First of all about the risk of more exclusion for the poorest and the weakest members of society, but also about the risk of a Big Brother-like turn that would, in the future, ban all non-traceable transaction and limit individual freedoms and the right to property.

We’re not there yet, and far from it. The field of payments is particular in that no innovation has ever succeeded in completely replacing the former method. “Digital methods of payments widen the offer. They’re not a replacement for cash,” says Lalanne. Cash is resisting and bank cards continue to grow despite the rise of transfers and mobile payments. Even checks are managing still to survive. We can rest assured, in other words, that our beloved bills will be with us for a while yet.

#cash #cashless society #digital payments

0 notes