VIEWS: 127 PAGES: 211

More Info
									          SHATTERED DREAM

                    [VOLUME II]

            REAL ESTATE
          BULL DOZES GOD’S
          The Holy Bible, New International Version. Pradis CD-ROM:Isa 5:8.
Isa 5:8
       Woe j to you who add house to house and join field to field k till no space is
                                left and you live alone in the land.
    Isa 5:9
            The LORD Almighty l has declared in my hearing: m “Surely the great
    houses will become desolate, n the fine mansions left without occupants. _

            HIS TENANTS

Home Foreclosures Hit Record High
Thursday, September 06, 2007,2933,295949,00.html

 The rate of home loans in foreclosure rose to a record high in the second
 quarter of 2007 as more homeowners in California, Florida and other states
 could not refinance their adjustable-rate mortgages, a trade group said on

 The Mortgage Bankers Association said 0.65 percent of loans entered the
 foreclosure process on a seasonally adjusted basis, 7 basis points higher than
 the previous quarter and up 22 basis points from a year earlier.

 It was the third straight quarter in which the foreclosure rate rose to a record-
 setting level and the worst is likely still ahead, the MBA said.

 "Where we might have suggested only one to three quarters to go, it is likely
 that has been extended to some degree and we will see delinquencies and
 foreclosure rise," said Douglas Duncan, the MBA's chief economist.

 The peak of loan failures might not hit for another year or more as many
 borrowers face increased payments on their adjustable-rate loans, he said.

 Foreclosures increased as the rate of delinquency on subprime loans offered to
 borrowers with poor credit rose to 14.82 percent in the second quarter from
 13.77 percent at the end of the first three months of 2007, and from 11.7
 percent in the year-ago period.

 While the national rate of failed loans continues to rise, the problems are
 concentrated in several of the states that saw the largest price gains during the
 recent housing boom, the trade association said.

 "What continues to drive the national numbers ... is what is happening in the
 states of California, Florida, Nevada and Arizona," said Duncan.

 Home buyers in those four states relied on the low, introductory costs of
 adjustable-rate mortgages. Payments on many of those loans are due to climb
 over the next year or so.
The national foreclosure rate excluding those four states actually declined in
the quarter, Duncan noted. But the states will continue to drive the national
averages because declining home prices there make it harder to refinance
loans, inventories of homes for sale are soaring and a disproportionate amount
of loans are to investors who have less at stake, he said.

Expected deeper house price declines into 2008 have sparked forecasts of a
steeper rise in delinquencies. The performance of loans, mostly subprime, has
already created steep losses in the $7.2 trillion mortgage securities market and
is the source of a rapid pull-back in credit to all kinds of consumers and
businesses around the world.

Delinquencies "have gone up, and that's expected," said Dan Seto, senior
economist at Sumitomo Mitsui Asset Management in New York. But "they
haven't gone up to the degree that the markets have priced in. These are not
disastrous numbers."

A weak economy and job losses in the Midwest have strained homeowners in
that region and pushed up the national rate of failing loans, the MBA said.

One of every hundred home loans in Michigan entered foreclosure process in
the last quarter, while Ohio has twice the national average of loans in serious
arrears, according to MBA data.

The reduction in credit led central banks in Europe and the United States to
inject billions of dollars into the banking system in recent weeks to keep the
credit tightening from affecting economic growth. The Federal Reserve has cut
the rate at which banks borrow from the central bank and is expected to lower
its key federal funds rate this month.

Duncan also noted that loans to strong borrowers in fixed-rate mortgages
continue to perform well even as subprime and adjustable-rate loans slide.

"The seriously delinquent rate for prime fixed-rate loans was essentially
unchanged from the first quarter of the year to the second," Duncan said in a

In that time, the rate of seriously delinquent subprime loans rose 277 basis
Mortgage Meltdown Threatens the American Dream,
Some Say - April 3, 2007,2933,263583,00.html?s

 CINCINNATI — For years, political leaders touted rising homeownership
 rates as a sign the "American Dream" was being fulfilled but more than a
 million looming foreclosures have called the dream into question.

 "We no longer have a problem with loan availability ... but a lot of our
 homeowners are one crisis away from losing their home," said Hope Wilson, a
 housing counselor at Working in Neighborhoods, a nonprofit trying to boost
 homeownership in inner-city Cincinnati.

 Click here to visit's Real Estate Center.

 There is no shortage these days of tragic stories of homeowners caught in
 America's subprime mortgage meltdown, as risky borrowing, reckless lending
 and a slump in the housing market drives millions into foreclosure.

 But while statistics show poor and minority homeowners are bearing the brunt
 of the crisis, the belief that every American can or should own their own home
 remains so pervasive few politicians admit that it just might not be true.

 "The more people who own their home, the better off America is," President
 Bush said in a 2004 speech. "See, we want more people owning something
 because when somebody owns something, they have a vital stake in the
 future of the country."

 After stagnating at about 65 percent for much of the 1960s, '70s and '80s, the
 U.S. homeownership rate has risen slowly in the past 15 years to nearly 69
 percent — a point of pride for Democrats and Republicans alike.

 But with an estimated 1.5 million homeowners facing foreclosure this year,
 Congress is now looking at tighter lending standards to protect unwary
 Americans from taking on loans they cannot afford.


 Despite the crisis, Massachusetts Democratic Rep. Barney Frank, who heads
 the House Financial Services Committee that likely will set new lending rules,
 is one of the few politicians willing to admit that homeownership is not for
"Not everyone is ready ever. A lot are not economically ready now," Frank
said in an interview with Reuters.

"This administration is acting as if the only important program to help people
with housing issues is to get them into homeownership. I think that
overemphasis has contributed to the subprime crisis. People were put into
homeownership who just economically should not have been there."

It's a tricky thing to say. Key to the American Dream is the belief that everyone
can make it to the top. Restricting lending is expected to disproportionately
hurt blacks and Hispanics — voters coveted by both Republicans and

Across the United States, racial minorities are more likely to get a high-cost,
subprime mortgage when buying a home than whites, according to a study
released last month by fair housing agencies. In six major U.S. cities, black
borrowers were 3.8 times more likely than whites to receive a higher-cost
home loan, it said.

But it is not just poor and minority Americans who are losing their homes —
many debt-ridden consumers simply were unwise in their loan choices. The
suggestion that more regulation is needed to protect Americans from willing
but risky lenders is controversial.

"Should we really interfere in a contract between two mature adults over
something that involves no deceit?" asked Ron Utt, a research fellow at the
right-leaning Heritage Foundation think-tank in Washington.


Utt believes tighter regulation by the Democrat-controlled Congress will cut off
loans to the same minorities both parties want to help into higher

"Subprime mortgages and 100 percent financing opened up homeownership
to people who otherwise financially would not be eligible," Utt said.

Housing advocates do not want to see a return of the days when many low-
income or minority Americans were shunned by lenders. But credit counselors
facing a tidal wave of panicked homeowners say many should not have taken
out — or qualified for — a home loan in the first place.

"Everyone wants immediate gratification. All they think is 'I want this house
now,"' said Joann Brady, director of the nonprofit Home Ownership Center of
Greater Cincinnati. "The lender was looking only at the bottom line. The client
was not reading the documents. It's both of their fault."
In any case, John Taylor, president of the National Community
Reinvestment Coalition, said politicians should not pretend that growth in
minority homeownership is anything more than a fleeting increase.

"We shouldn't make believe we're helping people into homeownership by
giving them a predatory product that creates a temporary homeownership," he
said. "Two years down the road they are on the street and ... in a much worse

"Is it paternalistic? Call it what you want. I don't care, I'm not running for office.
I just want to keep people in homes they can really afford."
Subprime Lender New Century Files for Bankruptcy
Monday , April 02, 2007,2933,263291,00.html?

LOS ANGELES — Subprime mortgage lender New Century Financial
Corp. filed Monday for Chapter 11 bankruptcy protection, and said it
would fire 3,200 workers, or 54 percent of its work force, to better
position the company for a possible sale.

Once the second-largest provider of subprime mortgages in the U.S. based on
loan volume, New Century was the latest lender to fall on hard times amid a
spike in mortgage defaults caused by borrowers unable to make payments.

More than two dozen subprime lenders have shut down in recent months and
others are scrambling to stay in business.

New Century said it has agreed to sell its loan servicing business to
Carrington Capital Management LLC and its affiliate for about $139 million,
subject to the approval of the bankruptcy court.

"The decision to pursue the sale of the company's assets and operations
through the bankruptcy process was a difficult but appropriate decision for our
board to make," president and chief executive Brad A. Morrice said in a

"This was a very hard step for me personally and clearly not the outcome I
would have preferred," Morrice said.

CIT Group and Greenwich Capital Financial Products Inc. have agreed to
provide up to $150 million in working capital to facilitate the reorganization
process, the company said.

New Century has also agreed to sell certain loans and residual interest in
some trusts to Greenwich Capital for $50 million.

New Century, based in Irvine, filed the bankruptcy action in U.S. Bankruptcy
Court for the District of Delaware. The move had been expected for several
Last week, New Century said several of its lenders planned to sell their
outstanding mortgage loans and use the proceeds to offset payment
obligations by the company, while retaining the right to recover the difference.

The company has signed consent agreements with several states and
received cease-and-desist orders from others in recent weeks.

The state agreements are intended to keep New Century from accepting new
mortgage applications on grounds that it has violated state laws, including
failing to fund mortgage loans after closing.
Stock Fall on Drop in Home Sales, Home Inventories
Monday , August 27, 2007

Wall Street pulled back Monday, losing momentum from last week's gains after
news that sales of existing homes slipped in July for a fifth straight month
stirred concerns about the strength of the economy.

Sales of existing homes slowed to their most sluggish pace in nearly five years,
while home prices fell for a record 12th straight month. The National
Association of Realtors reported that existing home sales slipped by 0.2
percent in July to a seasonally adjusted annual rate of 5.75 million units.
Inventories rose 5.1 percent to a record 4.59 million units.

The Dow fell 56.74, or 0.42 percent, to 13,322.13.

Broader stock indicators also declined. The Standard & Poor's 500 index fell
12.58, or 0.85 percent, to 1,466.79, and the Nasdaq composite index fell 15.44,
or 0.60 percent, to 2,561.25.

The pullback perhaps wasn't unexpected given last week's rally and that Wall
Street is still trying to sort out concerns about failing mortgages and tighter
access to cr for both individuals and corporations.

A fresh round of buyout news might have acted to limit the stock market's
losses Monday, which were small compared to the triple-digit plunges the Dow
Jones industrials suffered in early August. Stocks also pared their declines
after the Chicago Federal Reserve reported that manufacturing activity in the
Midwest ticked up 0.6 percent in July from June.

"I think there is still a little bit of nervousness about the cr market but that
seems to be abating slowly," said Brian Gendreau, an investment strategist for
ING Investment Management. "We had a very strong week last week and I
wouldn't attribute this downmarket to any return to panic," he said, referring to
concerns about bad loans and a drying up of liquidity that upset markets in
recent weeks. "I think it's just a normal down day."

Bonds rose sharply, with the yield on the benchmark 10-year Treasury note
falling to 4.57 percent from 4.62 percent late Friday. Bond prices move
opposite their yields.

Last week was a strong one for the markets following weeks of volatility owing
to worries that cr is shrinking to the point where it pinches economic and
corporate growth. The Dow finished up 2.29 percent for the week, the S&P 500
advanced 2.31 percent, and the Nasdaq jumped 2.86 percent.
Gendreau contends investors last week gained a sense that the subprime and
cr market problems weren't necessarily going to sink the economy although
bad news on that front could still deal investors a setback. Unease has
resurfaced in recent weeks that subprime mortgages -- those given to
borrowers with weak cr -- will continue to falter as housing markets cool and as
payments on adjustable-rate mortgages balloon.

"People realized, however severe the problems seemed to be in the cr area,
that unless there's some big macro impact from this, large multinationals with
strong overseas revenue should be able to whether these conditions fairly
well," Gendreau said.

That realization, however, makes the likelihood of an interest rate cut at the
Federal Reserve's next meeting less certain than it might have appeared two
weeks ago, he said. Gendreau noted the Fed has "gone out of its way" to add
liquidity, doing so again Monday with a $9.5 billion short-term injection into the
banking system.

"The big question is whether the market will accept that as an adequate Fed
response. What if the market doesn't get a rate cut? I think that won't be the
end of the world."

Investors faced such questions Monday amid fresh signals that there still
seems to be an appetite for corporate dealmaking. On Monday, U.S. Steel
Corp. (X) said it will buy Canada's Stelco Inc. for about $1.1 billion; Swiss
electrical engineer ABB Ltd. said it will sell its oil and gas production plant to
Chicago Bridge & Iron NV for $950 million; and Taiwanese computer vendor
Acer Inc. said it will acquire U.S. computer maker Gateway Inc. (GTW) for $710

But it's possible the huge buyout sums seen earlier in the year, which drove the
Dow to record highs last month, might slip as debt becomes more difficult to
take on. The Home Depot Inc. (HD) has tentatively agreed to sell its wholesale
distribution business to private equity firms for $8.5 billion, a person with direct
knowledge of the situation said Sunday, which is $1.8 billion less than originally
planned. The deal includes Home Depot guaranteeing $1 billion of the debt the
buyers will take on to complete the transaction.

Home Depot shares rose 57 cents to $34.25 on the tentative deal.

Gateway surged 61 cents, or 50 percent, to $1.82 after news it was being
acquired by Acer.

News of tie-ups among big companies seemed to offer little help to smaller
stocks Monday; the Russell 2000 index of smaller companies fell 9.48, or 1.19
percent, to 789.45.
 Wall Street often regards bigger companies as better able to withstand
 economic slowdowns, given that they can generally operate on slimmer profit
 margins. Gendreau noted that about half the revenue of the 30 companies that
 make up the Dow industrials is drawn from overseas, where economic growth
 is generally stronger.

 Declining issues outnumbered advancers by more than 2 to 1 on the New York
 Stock Exchange, where volume came to a light 1.1 billion shares compared
 with 1.18 billion shares traded Friday.

 The dollar was mixed against other major currencies, while gold prices fell.

 Light, sweet crude rose 97 cents to $72.06 per barrel on the New York
 Mercantile Exchange.

 In Asian trading, Japan's Nikkei stock average rose 0.32 percent, while China's
 Shanghai Composite Index, which hit record closes every day last week,
 gained 0.8 percent to another all-time high.

 In Europe, Germany's DAX index fell 0.28 percent and France's CAC-40 rose
 0.38 percent. Markets in Britain were closed for a bank holiday.,2933,294731,00.html

Five Big Mistakes Mortgage Seekers Make,2933,294754,00.html

 NEW YORK — With housing prices leveling off in many parts of the
 country, it's a good time for qualified buyers to shop around for a new
 home. But Editor Elizabeth Razzi warns there are five
 pitfalls to avoid when trying to secure a mortgage:

 Disregarding credit reports

 Establishing good credit is the key to locking in a favorable mortgage rate, yet
 many buyers fail to check their credit reports before applying for a home loan.
 Even the most fiscally responsible buyers shouldn't assume that their credit
 report is spotless. Why? Because one in four people reported finding serious
 errors on their credit reports, according to a 2004 study by U.S. PIRG, a
 federation of state public interest research groups, and errors like these can
 hurt your credit score.

Some buyers make the mistake of assuming that they can afford to borrow as
much money as lenders are willing to give them. Just because you qualify for
a loan doesn't mean it's in your best interest to take it. If you're already
struggling to pay rent and a lender offers you a loan requiring even higher
monthly payments, you should seriously consider the financial repercussions
before accepting it.

Changing jobs

If you have an unsteady employment history, you're likely to appear less than
stable in the eyes of a lender. It's particularly important to avoid job hopping
while your mortgage application is pending. If switching jobs in unavoidable,
angle for a position that offers the same or better pay.

Cutting down on credit cards

Paying down credit-card balances is an important part of responsible money
management, but closing accounts when you're trying to secure a mortgage is
a mistake. Contrary to what you might think, reducing the amount of credit
available to you during the buying process can make your credit score go
down rather than up.

Not taking advantage of a HELOC

If you are already a home owner and have an existing home equity line of
credit don't offload it before purchasing your new home. It can come in handy
if you need to temporarily cover the down payment while your old home is
being sold.
 Get The Facts On The Sub-Prime Mortgage Meltdown

 By Terry Keenan,2933,258926,00.html

 Confused about what the sub-prime mortgage meltdown means for the
 economy and your money?

 Well first, let's call a spade a spade. These risky mortgages aren't really so
 complex or exotic —they're junk mortgages, plain and simple. Sub-prime is
 just a euphemism bankers have whipped up to disguise their risk.

 It's been a familiar theme in the last few years, as other Wall Street word-
 meisters have taken to re-labeling risk as well. Leveraged buy-out firms are
 now called "private equity" shops, junk bonds now are "high yield," and hedge
 funds are supposedly, well ... hedged. It's a far cry from 20 years ago, when
 Drexel Burnham was firing up its junk bond machine.

 Back then, CNN founder Ted Turner had no problem boasting that junk bonds
 were for "people who couldn't borrow from the bank." He was right. And while
 Turner Broadcasting survived, Drexel and hundreds of other high-yield
 borrowers didn't. The fallout helped to exacerbate the Savings and Loan crisis,
 the real estate bust of the early 90s, and the recession of 1991-92. But at least
 investors were warned of the risk — the bonds belonged in the junkyard when
 it came to credit quality.

 Not so this time around. Although the housing bears have been warning the
 risky features of mortgage lending in recent years, those cautious few were
 laughed off. Few really talked about just how "sub" the sub-prime borrower
 really was.

 Well, now we know. Not only were millions able to borrow with no money
 down, no proof of income, not even proof of legal status, the Mortgage
 Bankers Association now says nearly 14 percent of those junky borrowers
 were delinquent on their mortgage payments at the end of 2006 — even with
 the economy at near full employment.

 Now that it's all over, except the crying, Washington is wading into the mess.
 With estimates floating around this week that 2.2 million Americans may lose
 their homes to foreclosure, Democrats are calling for hearings into so-called
 "predatory" lending practices. Yes, the very same lawmakers who turned a
 blind's eye to years of lax lending in their own backyard (at Fannie Mae and
 Freddie Mac) now want to turn millions of Americans into victims of the
 housing boom they championed.
 It's going to get messy, and that's why investors are frightened, and rightly so.
 As in the wake of other financial crises such as Enron, Orange County and
 Long Term Capital, the Fed, lawmakers and lenders are cracking now that the
 game has come to an end. Where were they to protect unqualified borrowers
 a year or two ago, when the trashy mortgage party was just kicking off?

 What the market is saying is that the hangover is here and it's going to be a
 doozy. Mortgages will be far harder to come by, down payments will go way
 up, home prices will continue to go down, and the money machine that was
 the $6.5 trillion mortgage industry will grind to a halt. That will hit the
 brokerage stocks, the banks, the homebuilders and the housing products
 stocks right in the bottom-line.

 And with those companies making up more than 30 percent of the value of the
 S&P 500, there's likely more fallout to come.,2933,259241,00.html

 Markets hate panic. And there are a lot of panicky people around right now
 saying panicky things. It’s kind of amazing that with all the wild talk the market
 hasn’t really nose-dived.

 Commodities investor Jim Rogers, who co-founded the Quantum Fund with
 billionaire investor George Soros in the 1970s, has looked at a small
 percentage of mortgage defaults and sees a real estate disaster right around
 the corner: “Real estate prices will go down 40-50 percent in bubble areas,” he
 warned on Friday. “There will be massive defaults. This time it'll be worse
 because we haven't had this kind of speculative buying in U.S. history.”

 Another doomsayer is U.S. Comptroller General David Walker, who’s slightly
 hysterical about another kind of debt—the debt of the U.S. government. He
 was on “60 Minutes” last week warning that the nation is about to go broke and
 is—in that tired, old phrase we last heard from Ross Perot—“mortgaging the
 future of our grandchildren.”

 Specifically, Mr. Walker told a worried reporter: “If nothing changes, the federal
 government’s not going to be able to do much more than pay the interest on
 the mounting debt and some entitlement benefits. It won’t have money left for
 anything else: national defense, homeland security, education, you name it.”

 Now before ripping into these two gentlemen, let’s get a few things clear.
 Defaults on loans are never good. And politicians have been spending too
 much of our money on wasteful government boondoggles for too long.

 Having acknowledged the obvious, here are a few facts to consider.
Subprime loans—the kind the market’s now fretting about—amount to about 20
percent of all mortgages. Of those, about 12 percent are now or are about to be
in default. In other words, about 2.6 percent of all loans are crashing.

That’s not a lot.

In fact, a real estate friend of ours in the mortgage business said that the
mortgage market could easily withstand a default rate of from 4 to 5 percent
without a major contraction. So to expect a 40 percent to 50 percent
contraction of the real estate market based on the current number of defaults
seems just a bit hysterical.

Now, as for Mr. Walker, he’s singing a blast from the past that’s reprieved
about every decade or so. The important thing to keep in mind when thinking
about the national debt is its size in relation to out entire economy. There have
been times when our nation has borrowed much more than we are borrowing

For example, during World War II, our national debt totaled more than 100
percent of our annual economy (known as Gross Domestic Product, or GDP).
Towards the end of the Cold War, our debt averaged about 50 percent of GDP.
As the Wall Street Journal pointed out in a 1994 editorial about the debt, “We
would certainly argue that winning the World War was worth borrowing 100
percent of GDP, and winning the Cold War was worth borrowing 50 percent of
GDP.” (WSJ, November 18, 1994)

Once the Cold War was officially ended with the 1989 downing of the Berlin
Wall and the subsequent demise of the Soviet Union, our federal deficit and
national debt began to decline. The “peace dividend” also coincided with a
(temporarily) more responsible government, divided between Republicans in
Congress and a pragmatic Democrat in the White House. The welfare reform
bill, regulatory and trade liberalization (like NAFTA) and other stimulants of
economic growth generated more private-sector income, while limiting the role
of the government in the economy. This helped reduce the deficit and led to a
budget surplus, until we were hit with the double whammy of the dotcom
bubble burst and 9/11.

Nowadays, we’re in the midst of a new war. I speak not of the battle in Iraq, but
of the larger World War against radical Islam. This is a war that’s worth winning
before terrorists create the kind of damage that would cost many times the
amount of money we’re now paying to service the debt. But still it will cost a lot
more money. Freedom is not free, and the debt will be necessary to help us
defend our freedoms.
Having said that, since the tax rate cuts of 2003 kicked in, we’ve seen a steady
decline in the rise of our budget deficit. This is due to the most fundamental law
of economics: Incentives matter.

As taxpayers are allowed to keep more of their earnings and investments, they
become more productive. They work harder and take money out of tax dodges
and put them back in the taxable economy. So you have the seemingly
contradictory effect of government tax receipts growing as tax rates decrease.

It worked now; it worked in the ‘80s with Reagan tax cuts, in the ‘60s with JFK
tax cuts, and in the ‘20s with the (Treasury Secretary) Mellon tax cuts. Had we
merely focused our intentions on balancing the books to lower deficits, the
country would not have grown and our deficits would likely have increased as a
percentage of GDP.

Do I like budget deficits? Of course not. But the problem with the folks that
shout loudest about deficits is that they are usually willing to sacrifice private-
sector growth (in the form of tax increases) for the sake of lowering the deficit.
In other words, they assume that a lower debt is better than anything, even if it
takes more cash out of the taxpayer’s pocket.

This is nonsense. There’s nothing wrong with cutting spending (i.e., the size of
our monster government) to lower the deficit. But there’s plenty wrong with
trying to lower the deficit (or the overall debt) by squeezing an overtaxed
population even more than they already are. Besides, as it’s been proved again
and again: if you raise tax rates, you very often end up with less revenue and
higher deficits.

Oh, did I mention that the market has gone up as all these doomsayers have
been predicting the worst for years and years? Will it continue to? Not always,
and not as quickly as it did in 2006.

But while doomsayers may be right occasionally (like the broken clock), they
shouldn’t be allowed to panic the markets with their dire predictions. Look at
the facts, don’t listen to hysterics.


It has been quite some time since the Dow dropped over 500 points in just a
few hours. Back then, the biggest terrorist attack in our nation’s history was
the culprit. Yesterday we had only the vague notion that the Chinese
Government is concerned about stock market speculation and their economy
to rattle the stock market.

How could such a relatively minor event lead to over a trillion dollars in global
stock market value vanishing? When the head of our Federal Reserve — a far
more powerful figure to the global economy and stock market — uttered his
now infamous “irrational exuberance” zinger at a dinner lecture in December
1996, the stock market didn’t even skip a beat.

As the dust settles you’ll be reassured by experts that nothing has
fundamentally changed since the day before the mini-crash. What a great
buying opportunity for the brave — to buy at a discount from the weak-kneed.
In fact something has changed — investors are now looking down as well as
up. Stocks have been almost artificially stable in recent years, with stocks
moving around with historically low up and down swings.

If you look at a one-year chart of a hot ETF like the iShares FTSE/Xinhua
China (FXI), you’ll see how it would be pretty easy for an investor to get
wrapped up in all the excitement, like Wile E. Coyote charging after the Road
Runner. When Mr. Coyote is going full speed ahead chasing performance, he
doesn’t realize he left the sound footing of the earth a few steps back. Even
though there is nothing fundamentally supporting Mr. Coyote, everything is
fine until he looks down. That’s when the sharp drop commences.

On February 27th, investors looked down. They didn’t like what they saw.

What if the Chinese economy slows? What if demand for commodities slips?
What if the U.S. economy slows like Mr. Irrational Exuberance himself just
said could happen this year? Maybe stocks in a communist country with
elevated political and financial risks shouldn’t trade at richer valuations than
similar stocks in the U.S. Until today, investors focused on potential growth.
Now they are looking at potential sink.

On my fund investing website investors can sift and screen
over 20,000 funds. In the 72 hours before the mini-crash, one of the top five
most viewed fund pages was a China fund, Oberweis China Opportunities
Fund (OBCHX). Hot returns attract attention. So far in 2007 mutual fund
investors have pored over $40 billion into stock funds — much of it into funds
investing overseas and in emerging markets. Unfortunately, fund investors
have a habit of getting most excited about an investment area shortly before
the good times end.

Back in 2000 the top searched for funds on our site invested in tech, growth,
and Internet stocks. Investors then and today were playing a game of
investing musical chairs. Eventually, the music stops and investors are left
scrambling for a chair. During the mini-crash that chair was safe U.S.
government bonds.

Dozens of mutual funds and ETFs (exchange traded funds) fell between 5%
and 10% in the mini-crash. Some leveraged funds fell almost 20%.
Worse, every market fell. There was no safety diversifying your portfolio into
different sectors and stock markets. Even with your money invested across
every single one of the hundreds of new ETFs launched in the last few years
you would have still lost money. This adds another layer of fear to today’s
investors: many were under the impression that the reason they lost money in
the 2000-2002 bear market was lack of diversification, all U.S. tech and no
global value. The mini-crash proves you can’t diversify away your downside
risk in stocks so easily anymore.

As fear sinks in, expect higher risk assets to lose their luster. This includes
emerging markets (stocks and bonds), high yield (junk) bonds, international
stocks in general, and REITs (which used to be low risk until they rocketed up
in price). Expect the conundrums in the market to fade, like why are junk
bonds trading at premium levels while bonds in general say the economy will
slow soon?

Relatively safe investments in each asset class should perform well in 2007.
This means low fee money market funds like Vanguard Prime Money Market
(VMMXX), short and intermediate term investment grade bond funds like
Vanguard Short-Term Investment-Grade Fund (VFSTX), and U.S. larger cap
growth stock funds like Vanguard U.S. Growth Fund Investor Shares
(VWUSX). Keep in mind stocks funds are always risky.

Eventually you’ll get another opportunity to buy higher risk assets on the
cheap. It’s a good thing, getting an actual reward for taking on risk.

The National Association of Realtors (NAR), whose members are known as Realtors
(rē(ə)ltər; -ˌtôr), is North America's largest trade association representing over 1 million
members (as reported in 2006), including NAR's institutes, societies, and councils,
involved in all aspects of the residential and commercial real estate industries. NAR also
functions as a Self Regulatory Organization for real estate brokerage. In the UK the
equivelant is the NAEA.

The National Association of Realtors was founded on May 12th, 1908 as the National
Association of Real Estate Exchanges, the founding group being located in Chicago,
Illinois. In 1916, the National Association of Real Estate Exchanges changed its name to
The National Association of Real Estate Boards. The current name was adopted in 1974.

NAR's membership is composed of residential and commercial real estate brokers, real
estate salespeople, immovable property managers, appraisers, counselors, and others
engaged in all aspects of the real estate (immovable property) industry, where a state
license to practice is required. Members belong to one or more of some 1,600 local
Associations of Realtors and Boards of Realtors in the 54 state and territory Associations
of Realtors. They are pledged to a code of ethics and Standards of Practice, [1]. which
includes duties to clients, the public, and other Realtors.

The National Association of Realtors is also a member of The Real Estate Roundtable, a
policy group in Washington, D.C.

The MLSs are to residential real estate what NASDAQ and the New York Stock
Exchange are to securities, and NAR governs the hundreds of local Multiple Listing
Services (MLSs) which are the information exchanges used across the nation by real
estate brokers. (However, there are many MLSs that are independent of NAR, although
membership is typically limited to licensed brokers and their agents; MLSPIN[3] is an
example of one of the larger independent MLSs in North America).

Through a complicated arrangement, NAR sets the policies for most of the Multiple
Listings Services and, in the late 1990s with the growth of the internet, NAR evolved
regulations allowing Information Data Exchanges ((IDX)) whereby brokers would allow
a portion of their data to be seen on the internet via brokers' or agents' websites and
Virtual Office Websites (VOW) which required potential buyers to register to obtain

These policies allowed "Participants" (whether they were individual one-man brokers or
large regional companies) to limit access to some or all of the MLS data by individual
brokers (whether they were brokers operating solely on the internet or local competitors).
In 2005, this prompted the Department of Justice to file an antitrust lawsuit against NAR
alleging its MLS rules in regard to these types of limitations on the display of data were
the product of a conspiracy to restrain trade by excluding brokers who used the internet to
operate differently from traditional "brick and mortar" brokers. For a description of the
DOJ action, see Antitrust Case filings for US v. National Association of Realtors.[4].
Action is pending.

In response, NAR has proposed setting up a single Internet Listing Display system which
will not allow Participants to exclude individual brokers (whether of a "bricks and
morter" type or solely internet-based) but require a blanket opting out of display on all
other brokers' sites.

Multiple Listing Service (MLS) (also Multiple Listing System or Multiple Listings
Service) is a database which allows real estate brokers representing sellers under a listing
contract to widely share information about properties with real estate brokers who may
represent potential buyers or wish to cooperate with a seller's broker in finding a buyer
for the property. The MLS combines the listings of all available properties that are
represented by brokers who are both members of that MLS system and of NAR or
CREA, (the National Association of Realtors in the US or the Canadian Real Estate

Although it is widely practiced in the US and Canada, MLS is also available in other
parts of the world.

The purpose of the MLS is to enable the efficient distribution of information so that,
when a real estate agent is introduced to a potential home buyer, he/she may search the
MLS system and retrieve information about all homes for sale in a given area or price
range, whether under a listing contract by that agent's brokerage or by all participating

The MLS systems are governed by private entities, and the rules are set by those entities
with no state or federal oversight, beyond any individual state rules regarding real estate.
MLS systems set their own rules for membership, access, and sharing of information, but
are subject to nationwide rules laid down by NAR or CREA. An MLS may be owned and
operated by a real estate company, a county or regional real estate Board of REALTORS
or Association of REALTORS, or by a trade association. Membership of the MLS is
generally considered to be essential to the practice of real estate brokerage.

Most MLS systems restrict membership and access to real estate brokers (and their
agents) who are appropriately licensed by the state (or province); are members of a local
Board or Association of REALTORS; and are members of the trade association (e.g.,

A person selling his/her own property - acting as a For Sale By Owner (or FSBO) -
cannot put a listing for the home directly into the MLS. Similarly, a properly licensed
broker who chooses to neither join the trade association nor operate a business within the
associations's rules, cannot join the MLS.

However, there are brokers and many online services which offer FSBO sellers the option
of listing their property in their local MLS database by paying a flat fee or another non-
traditional compensation method. This may be the fastest growing segment of the real
estate industry.

The largest MLS in the United States is currently the Washington, DC region's
Metropolitan Regional Information Systems, Inc (MRIS) covering Washington DC, most
of Maryland (including the Chesapeake Bay counties) and suburban Virginia counties,
and parts of West Virginia and Pennsylvania. It has 59,500 active members, according to
the public access sections of its website, [1], although numbers vary according to when

According to the Swanepoel TRENDS Report 2007 [2] the following are the MLS Boards
with more than 30,000 members:

      60,000 - Metropolitan Regional Information Systems - Washington, DC region
       (inc. Maryland & Virgina)
      55,000 - Southern California MLS[1]
      50,000 - MLS of Northern Illinois[2]
      42,000 - South East Florida Regional MLS[3]
      38,000 - First MLS[4] - Georgia and the Southeast
      37,000 - Arizona Regional MLS[5]
      35,000 - Georgia MLS [6] - Georgia
      33,000 - MLS Property Information Network [7] - Massachusetts and other part
       of New England
      32,000 - TREND [8] Philadelphia Metro area

Policies on sharing MLS data

The National Association of Realtors (NAR) has set policies that permit brokers to show
limited MLS information on their websites under a system known as IDX or Internet
Data Exchange. NAR has an ownership interest in Homestore, the company which
operates a website that has been given exclusive rights to display significant MLS
information. The site is

Using IDX search tools available on most real estate brokers' websites (as well as on
many individual agents' sites), potential buyers may view properties available on the
market, using search features such as location, type of property (single family, lease,
vacant land, duplex), property features (number of bedrooms and bathrooms), and price
ranges. In some instances photos can be viewed. Many allow for saving search criteria
and for daily email updates of newly-available properties. However, if a potential buyer
finds a property, he/she will still need to contact the listing agent (or their own agent) to
view the house and make an offer.
The U.S. Department of Justice filed an antitrust lawsuit in September 2005 against the
National Association of Realtors over NAR's policy which would have allowed brokers
to restrict access to their MLS information from appearing on the websites of certain
brokers which operate solely on the web. This policy would also have applied to
commercial entities which are also licenced brokerages, such as HomeGain, which solicit
clients by internet advertising and then provide referrals to local agents in return for a fee
of 25% to 35% of the commission.

The DOJ's antitrust claims also include NAR rules that exclude certain kinds of brokers
from membership in MLSs. NAR has revised its policies on allowing access on web sites
operated by member brokers and others to what might be considered as propriety data.

While IDX sites presently allow limited information to appear on all brokers' sites, new
proposals [3] state NAR's ILD policy will create Internet Listing Display sites and
individual brokers may opt out of allowing their listings to be seen on all websites:

       "Unless state law requires prior written consent, each Participant’s consent for
       display of that Participant’s listings on the ILD site of other MLS Participants is
       presumed unless a Participant affirmatively notifies the MLS in writing that it has
       withdrawn consent to such display (“opt out”).
       A Participant that opts out may not display on its ILD site(s) (including by
       framing any other website), if any, the listings of any other MLS Participant
       provided by the MLS.
       A Participant that opts out may not permit display of its listings on any ILD site of
       any other Participant. It may, however, display its listings on public websites of
       third parties, including but not limited to
       A decision to opt out may not be revoked for a period of ninety (90) days from the
       date the decision becomes effective"

Looking back in time, the MLS was supposed to be simple: A seller – a listing - an
agreement to share - a buyer - a sale. Everyone benefited, including the buyers and the
sellers. The MLS model in use today dates back to the 1960s when almost all brokers
involved in transactions represented the seller, either as the seller’s agent or as the
subagent of the listing broker. The seller paid the listing broker who, in turn, was
responsible for compensating the broker working with the buyer.

According to the Swanepoel TRENDS Report 2007 [4] this changed during the 1990s, with
the evolution of buyer’s agents, the advancement of the Internet, the subsequent and rapid
sharing of real estate listing data online, and the copyright door being thrown wide open.
Today there are 800+ MLS systems across the country and consolidation is inevitable.

The drive towards the freedom of information has caused MLS to evolve into a consumer
marketplace and a quasi public utility. That in turn has opened new competitors such as
Google, Yahoo!,, Trulia,,, and Craigslist all
searching for the winning model.
The NAR wields substantial power as a lobbying organization on behalf of agents and
brokers; in 2005, NAR had the largest Political Action Committee in the United States.
According to the Center for Responsive Politics, the Association is the United States'
third-largest donor to political campaigns, having given since 1990 more than US$ 30
million. Of this sum, an average of 47% has gone to Democratic and and 53% to
Republican recipients.[5] Key political issues for the group revolve around federal
regulation of the financial services industry.

The Real Estate Roundtable is a non-profit public policy organization in Washington,
D.C. that works on public policy issues affecting the real estate industry. The
Roundtable's policy issue focus includes specific issues such as taxation of carried
interests and terrorism insurance, along with issues in the areas of capital and cr,
environment and energy, homeland security and tax policy.

The Roundtable is involved in working on public policy issues on behalf of the
commercial real estate industry. It is not a real estate agency. Additionally, the
organization should not be confused with The Real Estate Roundtable of San Francisco
or the UC Real Estate Roundtable Program.

According to The Roundtable's Annual Report,

       The Real Estate Roundtable brings together leaders of the nation's
       privately owned and publicly held real estate owenship, development,
       lending and management firms with the leaders of national real estate
       trade associations to ensure a cohesive industry voice is heard by
       government officials and the public about real estate and its important role
       in the global economy. Collectively, Roundtable members hold portfolios
       containing over 5 billion square feet of developed property valued at
       nearly $700 billion. Participating trade associations represent more than 1
       million people involved in virtually every aspect of the real estate

They are also partnered with several national real estate trade organizations, including:

[] Association of Foreign Investors in Real Estate

Description: The Association of Foreign Investors in Real Estate (AFIRE) is the only not-
for-profit association for the foreign real estate investment community. AFIRE members
have a common interest in advocating and promoting international real estate
investments. Since 1988, AFIRE has provided an opportunity for the foreign investor in
the United States to become as knowledgeable as US domestic investors. Through an
exclusive membership of international investors from 17 countries AFIRE members
become a distinctive part of a global investing network. The Association is governed
solely by non-US investor institutions through their designated delegates and managed by
a full-time staff in Washington, DC.

[] American Hotel and Lodging Association

Description: AH&LA is a 94-year-old dual membership association of state and city
partner lodging associations throughout the United States with some 10,000 property
members nationwide, representing more than 1.4 million guest rooms. Headquartered in
Washington, D.C., it provides members with advocacy on Capitol Hill, public relations
and image management, education, research and information, and other services to ensure
a positive business climate for the U.S. lodging industry. Individual state associations
provide representation at the state level and offer many additional cost-saving benefits.

[] American Resort Development Association

The American Resort Development Association (ARDA) is the Washington, D.C.-based
trade association representing the vacation ownership and resort development industries.

[] Owners & Managers Association International

Description: BOMA International was founded in 1907 as the National Association of
Building Owners and Managers. The association assumed its present name in 1968 as it
broadened its reach to include Canada and other affiliates around the globe. BOMA
International is a primary source of information on office building development, leasing,
building operating costs, energy consumption patterns, local and national building codes,
legislation, occupancy statistics and technological developments. Throughout BOMA
International's long history, its goal has always focused on actively and responsibly
representing and promoting the interests of the commercial real estate industry through
effective leadership and advocacy, through the collection, analysis and dissemination of
information, and through professional development.

[] Commercial Mortgage Securities Association

Description: Headquartered in New York’s financial district, the Commercial Mortgage
Securities Association (CMSA) is an international trade organization dedicated to
fostering the continued growth, liquidity and efficiency of the commercial real estate
mortgage capital markets. Founded in 1994, CMSA’s membership has expanded to more
than 280 member firms, representing most of the nation’s leading CMBS originators,
issuers, investors and service providers, including the largest money-center banks,
investment banks, insurance companies, money managers, specialty finance companies,
loan servicers and rating agencies. CMSA also publishes CMBS World, the only
magazine solely-dedicated to CMBS.

[] International Council of Shopping Centers
Description: Founded in 1957, the International Council of Shopping Centers (ICSC) is
the global trade association of the retail real estate industry. Its 60,000 members in the
U.S., Canada and more than 100 other countries include shopping center owners,
developers, managers, marketing specialists, investors, lenders, retailers and other
professionals as well as academics and public officials. As the global industry trade
association, ICSC links with more than 20 national and regional shopping center councils
throughout the world. The principle aims of ICSC are to advance the development of the
retail real estate industry and to establish the individual shopping center as a major
institution in the community.

[] Mortgage Bankers Association

Description: The Mortgage Bankers Association (MBA) is the national association
representing the real estate finance industry, an industry that employs more than 500,000
people in virtually every community in the country. Headquartered in Washington, D.C.,
the association works to ensure the continued strength of the nation’s residential and
commercial real estate markets; to expand homeownership and extend access to
affordable housing to all Americans. MBA promotes fair and ethical lending practices
and fosters professional excellence among real estate finance employees through a wide
range of educational programs and a variety of publications. Its membership of over
3,000 companies includes all elements of real estate finance: mortgage companies,
mortgage brokers, commercial banks, thrifts, Wall Street conduits, life insurance
companies and others in the mortgage lending field.

[] National Apartment Assocation (NAA)

Description: The National Apartment Association (NAA) is America's advocate for
quality rental housing. NAA's mission is to serve the interests of multifamily housing
owners, managers, developers and suppliers and maintain a high level of professionalism
in the multifamily housing industry to better serve the rental housing needs of the public.
NAA is a federation of 192 state and local affiliates, composed of more than 51,000
multifamily housing companies representing more than 6.1 million apartment homes
throughout the United States and Canada. NAA, through a joint legislative alliance with
the National Multi Housing Council, monitors legislation and regulations in all 50 states
and shares that information with local and state affiliate staff.

[] National Association of Home Builders

NAHB is a Washington, D.C.-based trade association whose mission is to enhance the
climate for housing and the building industry. About one-third of NAHB’s 220,000
members are home builders and/or remodelers. The remaining members are associates
working in closely related fields within the housing industry, such as mortgage finance
and building products and services. NAHB analyzes policy issues, takes the industry's
story to the public, monitors and works toward improving the housing finance system,
and analyzes and forecasts economic trends.

[] National Association of Industrial and Office Properties

Description: The nation’s leading trade association for developers, owners, investors and
other professionals, NAIOP serves the real estate community involved in industrial,
office and mixed-use commercial. NAIOP was founded four decades ago and consists of
14,000+ members in 53 North American chapters. The organization provides networking
opportunities, educational programs, research on trends and innovations and strong
legislative representation.

[] National Association of Real Estate Investment Managers

Description: The National Association of Real Estate Managers was founded in 1990 to
provide the means for its members to meet in a non-competitive environment and have a
candid dialogue on the challenges and opportunities in our industry on a timely basis.
This is primarily accomplished through NAREIM's Discussion Forums, which focus on
operational and strategic issues and provide exposure to a variety of viewpoints from
Senior Level Officers who have responsibility for particular disciplines. NAREIM's
programs are highly interactive and highlight key issues on which strategic thinking is
currently being examined.

[] National Association of Real Estate Investment Trusts

Description: NAREIT is the national trade association for real estate investments trusts
(REITs) and publicly traded real estate companies. Members are real estate investment
trusts and other businesses that own, operate and finance income-producing real estate, as
well as those firms and individuals who advise, study and service those businesses.
Through REITs and other publicly traded real estate companies, income-producing
commercial real estate is accessible to investors small and large.

[] National Association of Realtors

The National Association of Realtors is America's largest trade association, representing
over 1.3 million members involved in all aspects of the residential and commercial real
estate industries.

[] National Multi Housing Council

Description: The NMHC represents one of the nation’s leading apartment firms. NMHC
members are the principal officers of the largest apartment owners, managers, developers,
and lenders.

[] Pension Real Estate Association
Description: PREA's mission is to serve its members engaged in institutional real estate
investment through the sponsorship of objective forums for education, research
initiatives, membership interaction and the exchange of information. We serve and
educate our members in the global institutional real estate investment community
regarding real estate investments.

[] The Urban Land Institute

Description: ULI—the Urban Land Institute is a community of practice for those engaged
in the entrepreneurial and collaborative process of real estate development and land use
policy-making. Founded in 1936, ULI now has 17,000 members working in the public
and private sectors, a staff of 100 in Washington, D.C., and a $27 million operating
budget. ULI members are the people that plan, develop and redevelop neighborhoods,
business districts and communities across the U.S. and around the world—experts from
13 different product sectors and 26 disciplines, working in private enterprise and public

[] Board of Directors and Staff
[] Leadership

In addition to a board of directors, The Roundtable has several policy committees. Their
leadership and committee members are drawn from their membership. For 2007-2008,
their leadership and committees are:

[] Officers

Chairman: Christopher J. Nassetta, President and CEO, Host Hotels & Resorts, Inc.
(Bethesda, MD)

President and CEO: Jeffrey D. DeBoer, The Real Estate Roundtable (Washington, DC)

Secretary: Daniel M. Neidich, Chairman and Co-CEO, Dune Capital Management, L.P.
(New York)

Treasurer: Penny Pritzker, President, Pritzker Realty Group, L.P. (Chicago)

Immediate Past Chairman Ex-Officio Member: Robert J. Lowe, Chairman and CEO,
Lowe Enterprises, Inc. (Los Angeles)

[] Board of Directors

      Lee Cotton,
President-Elect, Commercial Mortgage Securities Association (CMSA) -- Vice
Chairman, Centerline Capital Group (New York)

      John C. Cushman III,

Chairman, Cushman & Wakefield, Inc. (New York)

      Jon Fredricks,

Chairman, American Resort Development Association (ARDA) -- President, The Welk
Resort Group (San Diego, CA)

      Quintin E. Primo III,

CEO, Capri Capital (Chicago)

      Scott Rechler,

Chairman & CEO, RexCorp Realty LLC (Uniondale, NY)

      William C. Rudin,

President, Rudin Management Company, Inc. (New York)

      Peter S. Rummell,

Chairman and CEO, The St. Joe Company (Jacksonville, FL)

      Richard Saltzman,

President, Colony Capital (Los Angeles)

      Jeffrey Schwartz,

Chairman and CEO, ProLogis (Denver)

      Douglas W. Shorenstein,

Chairman and CEO, Shorenstein Company LLC (San Francisco)

      Thomas M. Stevens,

Immediate Past-President, National Association of Realtors (NAR) -- Senior Vice
President, Business Development, NRT, Inc (Parsippany, NJ)

      Robert S. Taubman,
Chairman, President and CEO, Taubman Centers, Inc. (Bloomfield Hills, MI)

      Rene Trembly,

Chairman, International Council of Shopping Centers (ICSC)-- President & CEO,
Ivanhoe Cambridge, Inc. (Montreal, Canada)

      Brenna S. Walraven

Chairman, Building Owners' Management Association, International (BOMA) --
Executive Director, USAA Real Estate Company (San Antonio, TX)

[] Committees
The Real Estate Roundtable also appointed the following members to leadership

[] Environment and Energy Policy Advisory Committee (EPAC)

Co-Chairmen: Dan A. Emmett, CEO, Douglas Emmett and Company (Santa Monica,
CA) and T. Patrick Duncan, President and CEO, USAA Real Estate Company (San
Antonio, TX)

Vice Chairman: George Caraghiaur, Vice President of Energy Services, Simon Property
Group (Indianapolis)

[] Real Estate Capital Policy Advisory Committee (RECPAC)

Co-Chairman: Stuart M. Rothenberg, Managing Director, Goldman, Sachs & Co. (New
York) and Bruce R. Cohen, CEO, Wrightwood Capital (Chicago)

Vice Chairman: Michael Katz, Senior Executive Vice President, Sterling Equities (New

[] Research Committee

Chairman: Thomas Garbutt, Managing Director, TIAA (New York) Vice Chairman:
William S. Buchanan, Sr., Founder, E2M Partners (Dallas)

[] Tax Policy Advisory Committee (TPAC)

Chairman: Frank G. Creamer, Jr., Executive Vice President, MMA Realty Capital, Inc.
(New York) Vice Chairman: Blake D. Rubin, Partner, Arnold & Porter (Washington,

[] Homeland Security Task Force (HSTF)
Co-Chairman: William J. Shaw, President and COO, Marriott International, Inc.
(Washington, DC) and William C. Rudin, President, Rudin Management Company (New

Vice Chairman: Robert Speyer, Senior Managing Director, Tishman Speyer (New York)

[] Staff

The current staff include:

      Jeff DeBoer, President and CEO

      Stephen M. Renna, Sr. Vice President and Counsel

      Roger Platt, Sr. Vice President and Counsel

      Clifton E. (Chip) Rodgers, Jr., Sr. Vice President

      Xenia Jowyk, Director of Public Affairs

      Scott Sherwood, Director of Public Affairs

      Nancy Pitcher, Director of Administration

      Elizabeth H. Karch, Systems Administrator

      Michelle M. Reid, Executive Assistant and Meeting Director

      Rebecca Doll, Staff Assistant

[] Agenda
The Real Estate Roundtable's policy agenda for 2007-2008 includes:

      Advancing reliable policy on capital gains, carried interests, leasehold
       improvements, brownfields cleanup cost expensing, and other tax policy issues;

      Developing a long-term, public-private solution on terrorism insurance;

      Ensuring that any federal action regarding local governments' eminent domain
       powers is equitable and balanced;

      Ensuring that bank lending to commercial real estate is not inadvertently
       discouraged by overzealous regulatory oversight;
[] Publications
[] Roundtable Weekly

Roundtable Weekly is a weekly policy news digest posted online every Friday evening.
Its primary focus is policy news affecting the real estate industry. It informs members of
relevant actions taken by policy-makers and the Roundtable. Roundtable Weekly also
serves to inform members of upcoming events, take surveys and perform other two-way

[] Policy Agenda

The Real Estate Roundtable publishes an annual policy agenda to inform the industry,
policymakers and the public about public policy issues affecting real estate and the

[] Annual Reports

The Roundtable presents a summary of the years issues, events and actions undertaken to
accomplish its policy agena.

[] Real Estate Forum Magazine

CEO and President Jeff DeBoer wrote a bimonthly column on issues pertaining to the
commercial real estate industry. The final column was published in March 2007.

[] Real Estate Industry Research
While the Roundtable must undertake quite a bit of original research to fulfill their
mission of influencing public policy they also partner with their members and several
other interested parties to collect and present information on the real estate industry.

According to their website, their research committee is currently working with the
following organizations:

[] Universities

Columbia Business School Real Estate Publications & Research

Among Columbia Business School’s chief goals — and one the program shares — is the
leveraging of intellectual capital. Books and articles written by faculty members, the
decade-long Case-Study Project and student research are just some of the ways in which
the MBA Real Estate Program lends its vigor to the effort.

MIT’s Center for Real Estate (CRE
The Center for Real Estate (CRE) is a focal point for real estate education and research at
the Massachusetts Institute of Technology. Since it was established in 1983, MIT has
awarded the Master's degree in Real Estate Development to almost 600 graduates of the
program, ten percent of whom also received joint degrees from associated departments at
MIT. The one-year program was the first of its kind and has served as a model for
graduate degree programs at other universities both in the U.S. and abroad The Center
has also supported the work of more than a dozen doctoral students concentrating in real
estate. It sponsors non-partisan research by its distinguished faculty on critical issues in
real estate. This research is essential to promoting new knowledge, advancing teaching
techniques, and bridging the gap between theory and practice.

CULER: The Wisconsin Center for Urban Land Economics Research

The Center for Urban Land Economics Research (CULER) has long been an important
component of the Program in Real Estate and Urban Land Economics at the University of
Wisconsin - Madison. The Center encourages research, education, and service activity
relating to the real estate and urban land economics discipline.

Fisher Center for Real Estate and Urban Economics (Berkely)

The Haas School of Business at the University of California, Berkley offers research on
areas including: Housing Markets, Nonresidential Real Estate, The Internet, E-Commerce
and Real Estate, Financial Instruments and Financial Institutions. Information is offered
in college/professor paper format.

USC Lusk Center for Real Estate

The University of Southern California’s Lusk Center publishes real estate research briefs
on an approximate monthly schedule over the course of the academic year. The Briefs
provide condensed presentation of USC scholarly research in real estate and are oriented
to the professional, academic, and policy communities. Individual copies of recent Real
Estate Briefs are available in printed form on this website.

[] Other Institutions

Cushman & Wakefield

Cushman & Wakefield is a global real estate services firm that publishes worldwide
market research studies and reports.

National Council of Real Estate Investment Fiduciaries

The National Council of Real Estate Investment Fiduciaries (NCREIF) is an association
of institutional real estate professionals composed of investment managers, plan sponsors,
academicians, consultants, appraisers, CPA's and other service providers who have a
significant involvement in pension fund real estate investments.
Property & Portfolio Research

Property & Portfolio Research (PPR) provides independent real estate research and
portfolio strategy services to participants in the institutional real estate community.

There is a cost for research information services that include: Fundamentals, PPR/Dodge
Pipeline, CMBS Service, REIT Service and National Real Estate Index.

Real Estate Research Institute

The Real Estate Research Institute (RERI) is a non-profit organization created to
stimulate high quality research on real estate investment performance and market
fundamentals that will elevate the quality of real estate decision making. RERI has a long
tradition of providing support for quality research within the field of real estate. RERI has
funded over $1 million of real estate research under the direction of some of the world's
leading real estate academics and practitioners.


Reis publishes reliable, objective data on individual properties and multiple submarkets
and metros across the four principal property types in 80 U.S. metropolitan areas. The
Reis Reports, Inc. was founded in 1980 to promote the use of real estate market research
services among institutional owners. contains corporate real estate and economic development information.
Search by state and county for key area demographics. Links to other area economic
development sites, incentives, area profiles and Site Selection Online Magazine.

Torto Wheaton Research

Torto Wheaton Research (TWR) provides commercial real estate data, analysis and
consulting. TWR tracks and forecasts commercial real estate supply and demand
indicators on a quarterly basis.
August 10, 2007
“Shoddy” Lending Practices Led to Subprime Lending Crash
Filed under: Home Mortgage, Mortgage News, Real Estate News — Miranda Marquit @
1:16 pm

As the housing demand (or rather, the lack thereof) precipitates a mortgage rate drop,
there are rumors flying about that the Federal Reserve may contribute its own interest rate
cut to the mix. Indeed, there are rumors of an emergency Federal Reserve meeting to be
held, and the Fed has already pumped emergency funds into the banking sector to keep it
afloat. Indeed, after stating not too long ago that the subprime lending crash was
contained, Federal Reserve chairman Ben Bernanke has been faced with the
uncomfortable truth that the problem is actually contagious, as Bloomberg points out:

       “The subprime mess is now spreading to banks,” says Nariman
       Behravesh, chief economist at Global Insight Inc. in Lexington,
       Massachusetts. “A lot of international banks, especially those in Europe,
       did invest a lot in the collateralized debt markets, especially the subprime
       situation here in the U.S., so they’re suffering.”

And the U.S. has it even worse. But how did it come to this? Well, the Wall Street
Journal today makes it very clear today that the problem has been lending practices that
did less than due diligence on verification and documentation. Indeed, many people who
probably should not have had home mortgage loans got them — and then ended up in
foreclosure. The Wall Street Journal reports on these “shoddy” lending practices:

       Lending practices in the subprime market were “shoddy and absurd,”
       said John Makin of the American Enterprise Institute in March of this
       year. Lewis Ranieri, former chairman of Salomon Brothers, echoed those
       comments in this newspaper when he observed: “We’re not really sure
       what the guy’s income is and . . . we’re not sure what the house is worth.
       So you can understand why some of us become a little nervous.”

The results? Well, you can probably get a good deal on a house. And you can probably
get a good mortgage rate now. But you have to have good credit. And you have to have
more documentation. So it’s harder to do. But if you can do it, you might end up with a
good deal.
 Federal Investigators Probing Home Builder Beazer's Mortgage Business

  Wednesday, March 28, 2007,2933,261922,00.html?

 Beazer Homes USA Inc.(BZH), the sixth-largest U.S. home builder, on
 Wednesday confirmed it is cooperating with federal prosecutors in a probe
 relating to its mortgage business.

 The Atlanta-based company said it has been in contact with the U.S. attorney's
 office and received a request for documents concerning the mortgage
 business. "At this time, there have been no allegations of any wrongdoing," it
 said in a statement.

 Beazer made its comments one day after a representative at the FBI's office in
 Charlotte, North Carolina, said the agency was "conducting a potential fraud
 investigation" regarding Beazer.

 Click here to visit's Real Estate Center.

 Earlier Tuesday, BusinessWeek said U.S. authorities were investigating
 Beazer's lending practices.

 Beazer's shares were off 12 percent at $27.64 in premarket electronic trading
 after earlier falling 18 percent to their lowest level since August 2003.

 BusinessWeek said the FBI, Internal Revenue Service and Justice
 Department recently opened a probe into Beazer's lending practices.

 The investigation followed articles published this month by the Charlotte
 Observer newspaper that detailed allegations of abusive lending practices and
 high foreclosure rates in some Beazer developments, BusinessWeek said.

 Beazer builds many houses for first-time home buyers. The company said it
 has found no evidence in internal investigations to support allegations in the
 Observer articles.

 Last week, a North Carolina law firm filed a lawsuit in state court seeking class-
 action status against Beazer, accusing the home builder and its mortgage
 company of selling mortgages to unqualified buyers. The suit seeks damages
 for each class member of less than $74,999.
 Study: More Foreclosures Likely as Mortgage Rates Bump
  Monday , March 19, 2007,2933,259589,00.html?

 About 1.1 million additional home foreclosures are expected over the next six
 years as adjustable-rate mortgages — which made home buying more
 affordable to U.S. buyers in recent years — reset to higher payments,
 according to a study by research firm First American CoreLogic.

 The expected $112 billion in losses won't break the mortgage industry but will
 inflict pain on lenders and borrowers affected by the defaults, said the study,
 released on Monday.

 Click here to visit's Real Estate Center.

 "It's less than we spend on alcohol. It's less than we spend on the lottery and
 gambling," said Christopher Cagan, director of research and analytics, and
 author of the report Mortgage Payment Reset, The Issue and the Impact.

 "The price of gasoline has far more impact. We have $60 billion a month in
 trade deficit that dwarfs this," he added.

 Some loans made over the past few years were designed to allow initial
 periods of low payments. Many of those were "teaser" loans, which called for
 very low initial interest rates. A large chunk of the initial low-interest and
 teaser-rate loans are scheduled to reset to higher and longer term rates.
 Some "negative amortization" loans will call for larger principal payments than
 the initial loan.

 Many borrowers are likely to face the double-pressure of a large reset while at
 the same time, stagnant or fallen property values and little money down will
 leave many borrowers with no equity, or ownership in the home above the
 mortgage. That may hasten defaults and foreclosures.

 The study forecasts that the defaults won't severely hurt the economy and will
 account for about 0.36 percent of U.S. Gross Domestic Product. However,
 recent reports of default troubles in loans made to borrowers with weak credit
 histories helped send the stock market into a funk.

 "That's what gets the attention," Cagan said. "The traffic report reports the
 accidents. It doesn't report the normal traffic."
The report focused on single-family residences and reviewed only the impact of
loans that will reset to new rates. It also assumed that prices will stay level with
those at the end of 2006. However, a 1 percent rise in national prices will cause
70,000 fewer loans to be lost from reset-driven foreclosures, while a 1 percent
price decline will force an additional 70,000 into foreclosure.

The U.S. mortgage industry loans about $2 trillion each year, so the loses from
foreclosures may be less than one percent of total lending, the report said.

"The problem is this falls on a slice of lenders, investors and borrowers — 1 or
2 percent of them — that gets stunned," Cagan said.

The percentage of loans resetting with negative equity is expected to leap from
12.9 percent in 2007 to 24.4 percent in 2008. That's when some of the most
frequently used 2/28 mortgages, which called for two years of low payments
and 28 years of higher payments, and 3/27 mortgages, which called for three
years of low payments and 27 years of higher payments, are scheduled to

Still, more than 93 percent of the 32 million single-family residences' valuations
and loans in the study had positive equity.

The 1.1 million foreclosures represents about 13 percent of the adjustable-rate
mortgages originated through purchase or refinance from 2004 to 2006,
equaling about $326 billion in debt.

The study assumed that after all the foreclosure sales would be completed,
about $112 billion would be lost.

But the study also projected that the pain would not be spread evenly. The
"teaser" loan group is expected to see 32 percent of those mortgage defaults
because of resetting, while 12 percent of sub-prime loans are expected to
default. About 7 percent of market-rate adjustable loans are expected to default
through resetting.

However, many lenders already are working with clients to modify terms or
refinance existing loans to avoid default.

"Many lenders do not want an empty house on their hands or an empty condo,
which will take them a year to sell and they have to pay maintenance, taxes
and insurance," Cagan said.,2933,167776,00.html?

 Pay close attention to what your mortgage lender tells you.

 1. "This isn't the right loan for you."
 2. "A slightly higher rate for you means a big check for me."
 3. "Don't count on your rate lock when rates are rising."
 4. "Our APR doesn't mean what you think it does."
 5. "We never met a fee we didn't like."
 6. "We're in cahoots with your real estate broker."
 7. "Once you buy mortgage insurance, good luck canceling it."
 8. "You should worry about our finances, too."
 9. "You're 'prequalified'? Don't bank on it."
 10. "What happened to your prepayments? Can't be sure."

 1. "This isn't the right loan for you."
 You've found your dream house and now all you need is a loan. Hold
 everything, even if you've been through this drill before. When interest rates are
 rising and lenders' business is slowing down, they often get desperate. The
 result: You may be pitched a loan that's totally inappropriate for your needs. "A
 loan is a product, and just as in any business where you make money by
 selling a product, (loan officers) overreach in their sales pitches," says Michael
 McCann, a California attorney specializing in banking law.

 One mistake common to many borrowers is taking a one-year adjustable-rate
 mortgage because of the "sucker rate," an artificially low rate that hops up
 quickly in the second year, says North Carolina mortgage broker Christopher
 Cruise. "All they want is to get into the home." If you know you are going to be
 in your house for more than just two or three years, you ought to consider
 getting a delayed adjustable or two-step mortgage, which adjusts to a fixed rate
 after a set period. You'll pay a higher rate at first but won't get that immediate
 "bounce" that comes with most one-year ARMs.
 Back to Top

 2. "A slightly higher rate for you means a big paycheck for me."
 Getting you a loan with the lowest possible interest rate is not necessarily in
 your lender's best interest. Rather, he probably wants you to take the highest
 rate that you can afford. That's because on top of their regular commission --
 usually 1% of the loan -- lenders can earn an "overage" of another 1% to 2% if
 they sell you a loan that is more expensive than the best available deal.

 Sometimes they mark up the rate by one point; other times, it's just half a point.
 In any case, it adds up. One Fairfield, Conn., couple has to pay an extra $1,000
 every year on their $230,000 mortgage because their loan officer sold them a
 30-year loan at 9.5% -- higher than the best rate that day. The reason: For
charging the higher rate, the broker reaped a 1% commission from the lender --
along with a 0.5% fee the Connecticut couple paid him. That's a shame, says
Peggy Twohig, Assistant Director for Credit Practices at the Federal Trade
Commission. "Most consumers know enough to shop around. Lender A tells
them 10.25% and Lender B says 10%. But they don't know that Lender B can
go down to 9.75% because they don't bother to ask." To keep this from
happening, get your loan officer to show you the daily rate card -- a printout
that lists the lowest available rate on all of his products.
Back to Top

3. "Don't count on your rate lock when rates are rising."
Even though you've locked in the interest rate on your new loan for 60 days,
don't count on getting the rate when your application is approved. Sometimes
lenders will actually hold up your application if it means you'll have to pay a
higher rate. In 1993, the Federal Trade Commission charged Lomas Mortgage
USA, one of the nation's largest lenders, with falsely promising borrowers that it
would unconditionally lock in the mortgage rate and discount points for 60
days. In fact, in many instances Lomas levied higher rates and more points
within the 60-day period, the Commission charged. The Dallas lender settled
with the FTC in July, 1993, and agreed to pay $300,000 in so-called "consumer

"It's the lender who has control over how quickly the paperwork gets done,"
notes Michelle Meier, a lawyer with the Washington activist group Consumers
Union. "And there are always all kinds of reasons why that locked-in rate is
unavailable by the time they get to closing."

As interest rates rise, so do rate-lock complaints. Patricia Cunningham,
Consumer Affairs Manager at the Illinois Office of Banks and Real Estate, says
that in 1994, when interest rates were high, more than 600 rate-lock complaints
came in. In 1995, when interest rates fell, so did the number of complaints -- by
half. In 1996, with interest rates back up again, the number of complaints also
Back to Top

4."Our APR doesn't mean what you think it does."
When lenders advertise their loans, they use annual percentage rates, or
APRs. The APR is supposed to help you compare loans on equal terms by
combining the fees and points with a year of interest charges to give you a
loan's true annual cost.

The problem is, every lender's APR policies differ. Some include their
application fees in the APR, some don't. So two loans from different banks may
have different APRs even though they have identical rates and points. To
complicate things even more, APRs also vary depending on the size of the
loan, whether it is adjustable or fixed, and on the lenders' requirements for
mortgage and title insurance. Not many people understand the differences,
says Keith T. Gumbinger, an analyst with HSH Associates, a New Jersey
mortgage research and tracking service. "We have studied it and determined
that (the APR) is fairly meaningless."
Back to Top

5. "We never met a fee we didn't like."
It's bad enough being nickel-and-dimed over a checking account. ("What? A
$10 charge when someone else's check bounces?") But when banks make
home loans, the extra fees can go through the roof -- often to the point of being

Lenders are required by Respa, the Real Estate Settlement Procedures Act, to
give you a good-faith estimate of your closing costs when you hand in your
application, and extra charges are a violation of the law. But some banks try to
sneak them in anyway. "I've seen $150 messenger fees," says Charles Baird,
an Atlanta lawyer who has represented a number of people who have sued
their mortgage lenders. "I also see strange fees, like a 'jumbo warehousing' fee.
Many don't refer to any real service, but I see them on settlement papers all the
time. Lenders tend to be very creative when it comes to fees."

Always ask for a detailed, itemized list of your estimated closing costs when
you hand in your loan application. It's required by law. Then on closing day look
carefully at the figure called "amount financed" on your settlement papers. If it
does not equal the principal you are borrowing, minus any points or interest
paid upfront, ask your loan officer why. It could mean he slipped some fees into
the amount financed and you can guess what that means: You'll pay interest on
those charges.
Back to Top

6. "We're in cahoots with your real estate broker."
When shopping for a product, it's always best to get a recommendation, right?
That depends on who's doing the recommending. A real estate agent who
directs you to his or her favorite lender is not necessarily offering you the best
deal. In fact, there's a chance the lender paid your broker a fee for the referral -
- a practice that is illegal.

In a handful of states, such as California and Minnesota, real estate brokers
can negotiate mortgage loans. Depending on how well this area is regulated in
your state, this could be cause for worry. Is the loan offered going to be the
best deal you could get? Peter G. Miller, a former agent and author of The
Mortgage Hunter (HarperCollins, $13.50), raises another concern for the buyer.
"The second issue is, will my confidential financial information be transmitted to
the seller? And will that give the seller a negotiating advantage?" He points out
that the real estate broker is often obligated to get the seller the best possible
price for the property. If the broker knows your financial background, that could
prove very useful to the seller.

Other types of lending partnerships are cropping up around the country. For
instance, computerized loan originators, which allow borrowers to scan
selected lenders' deals on PCs, are up and running in many real estate offices.
The U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development is currently trying to
revise its regulations in this area to address issues like disclosure of the
relationship between the real estate broker and the lender. The aim is to
ensure that consumers can benefit from this kind of system, but are protected
from any possible abuse. In the meantime, you don't necessarily want to avoid
these offers. They may be the best deals around. But "may be" are the
operative words.
Back to Top

7. "Once you buy mortgage insurance, good luck cancelling it."
You need to buy mortgage insurance because you can afford only 15% of your
down payment, but your lender assures you it's no big deal. Once your equity
grows to 20%, he says, you can bag the insurance payments. Not necessarily.
The Homeowners Protection Act of 1998 requires lenders to automatically
cancel the mortgage insurance once the homeowner's equity reaches 22%.
Before that, it's the lender's prerogative. And the 22% rule only applies to
standard mortgages (not high-risk) initiated after July 29, 1999 for which
payments are current.

PMI can be expensive. On a mortgage on a $200,000 home, with 15% down, a
buyer's mortgage insurance will cost about $43 a month, or $516 a year. With
just 5% down, the cost goes up to $120 a month, which is almost three times
as much, according to GE Capital Mortgage Insurance. Depending on which
insurer you go with, it can cost even more. Some require an additional fee
upfront -- on top of the monthly payment -- of as much as 1% of your loan if you
put only 5% down. Since your lender typically chooses your insurer, this is
probably going to be beyond your control as well.

The key is to understand the terms of your mortgage insurance obligations
before you close your loan. Get your lender to explain what conditions you
have to fulfill before you can stop paying for insurance. Some lenders simply
require an appraisal to prove you've paid down 20% of the home's value.
Back to Top

8. "You should worry about our finances too."
The chances that your bank will go under are slim, but it does happen. Shanda
and Steve Falcon know all too well. It took Abbey Financial, a lender in
Cambridge, Mass., six months to refinance the Falcons' mortgage. Four days
later, the deal fell apart and Abbey declared bankruptcy. The Falcons were out
no small amount of money, including $1,700 they paid for a rate lock. And they
weren't the only ones. Abbey's bankruptcy stranded 867 other homeowners in
six states.

Think it couldn't happen to you? Think again. Things have calmed down since
interest rates have fallen from the highs of 1994. But Mark Thomson, a
department of financial institutions assistant director in Washington State,
warns that "rates could get bumped back up at any time, and the same
situation would replay -- if the market dries up, firms that aren't financially
stable are going to have a difficult time." The upshot: If your mortgage banker
or broker shuts down, your file may land on a trash heap and you'll have to
start your loan-hunting-and-gathering expedition all over.
Back to Top

9. "You're 'prequalified'? Don't bank on it."
Lenders will tell you that prequalified borrowers practically have their mortgage
in the bag. But they often don't mean it. Sometimes they will preapprove you
based on what you have written or verbally stated with no verification. These
are called "wastebasket" approvals. When it comes to actually getting a
mortgage, they don't mean anything. That final approval is dependent on
verification of that information. This can mean trouble all around. Once a client
of Ray Rizio, a real estate attorney in Bridgeport, Conn., went into contract with
a buyer who had been preapproved by a local lender. "Three other deals went
into contract based on this preapproved buyer -- it was a sure thing," he says. It
wasn't. The buyer wasn't a U.S. citizen, he had five different employers, and he
had horrible credit. "The lender didn't even pull his credit report," says Rizio.

Happily, lenders are adopting tougher preapproval rules. But get it in writing
before you make any plans based on a lender's word.
Back to Top

10. "What happened to your prepayments? Can't be sure."
Many homeowners pay down their principal early, bit by bit. It's a great way to
reduce your interest payments over time. But often those extra payments will
sit in an escrow account -- and won't be credited toward your principal --
because your lender doesn't know what to do with them.

In 1993 Kathleen and Hal Aaron paid an extra $1,017 on their $117,000 one-
year adjustable-rate mortgage for their New York City pied-a-terre. But when
they got their year-end mortgage statement, there was no record of that
payment. Where was the money? The Aaron's lender had stashed it in a
savings account. Only after two months of phone calls and irritation was the
bank able to find the cash and put it where it belonged.

Why aren't lenders on the ball? It confuses payment schedules, for one thing.
But lenders also make money on the interest you pay -- income that's
eliminated when you prepay your principal.


       Jesus said, “You cannot serve both God and Money.”

       The enemies of America have something to say that is quite true about

Capitalism, in that it is a man-made system that should not be imposed on the world.

People were created to be free and mankind has put a price on people, on land, on food,

on clothing, on shelter, on trees, flowers, birds, and on just about everything.

       Well, we are turned off by today’s churches because, as a business locked into the

economy, they serve money as much as they serve God and have become a business

dependent upon the System. They preach about submission to the governing authorities

because they depend upon the governing authorities to survive.

       To say that just because tyranny, economically has existed throughout all time

and justifies today’s modern economic system is a cop out. What we need is radical

reformation, such as I suggested in my short book entitled: A NEW CONSTITUTION


SLAVERY. It would take a massive overhaul of the current institutions with people

protesting in mass, boycotting every university, corporation, school, and business

throughout the world, which is locked into the financial powerhouses.

       The terrorists are wrong in applying violence, death, and destruction to

individuals related to banking institutions. What we need to do is not to kill the beast or

his people, but to just simply reject and be rejected, which will cost us everything. Death
will become our life, as the Book of Revelation declares for those who are urged to

endure patiently until the time of the end. We are not called to war against the beast on a

warmongering level, although we could unite with Israel in destroying the entire world

through nuclear warfare and support their leaders with thoughts of destroying all Islamic

and Communistic states. However, as individuals, we will have to start a massive

revolution to rebel against the current economic authorities who are signing away our

lives with communistic rules & policies that are not leading to our salvation.

       What the Rockefellers sought to do was take churches that were drowning in debt

and save them by building bigger and better schools, libraries and church buildings, as

well as Seminaries. The Baptists and Congregationalists, Episcopalians and several other

Churches received millions of dollars in grants, loans, & special contributions to keep

their doors open and the churches built bigger buildings and became more financially

prosperous. As a return for Church planting, Churches would receive “TAX EXEMPT

STATUS,” and not have to pay the government business taxes.

       In a country that believes in the separation of Church and State, the States gained

control over our Churches not just through taxes, but through the banks and super banks

which gained control over our universities and colleges. Church Seminaries in every

Christian denomination would become largely owned and controlled by FEDERAL

STUDENT LOAN GRANTS to students seeking to ‘better their education’ and avoid

poverty as if poverty was a disease instead of the cure. The Rockefeller and Illuminati

goal was to gain control of the entire world through organization and through a SYSTEM

which they felt would improve society.
       Have they really improved society? Can a Pastor become ordained without

spending thousands of dollars on a College Degree? Can a Pastor ascend to the pulpit

and write books without having to have a Master’s in something? Yes, a Pastor can get a

mail ordination today for thirty dollars and get an honorary Doctor of Divinity Degree

and a Pastor can self-publish his own books (the route I took to beat their system),

however, such Pastors will usually not get paid well (unless they took classes and have a

reputation at a Big College or a Big University. Your voice will not be heard unless you

have gone into FEDERAL STUDENT LOAN DEBT to pay for your education and we,

as the lay people, blindly followed this financial system without so much as a blink.

       Although drugs & sexual immorality ruined the cause of the protests of the Hippie

Movement in the 1960s, the 1960s was America’s fighting chance to rebel against

imperial capitalism and to stand united together against the corporate pigs who were in

charge of the global economy. Unfortunately, when the war died, the protests died, and

all of the great rebels of my parent’s generation went back to school, went back to the

bank, went back to ‘WORK’ and decided to forget about rebelling against global imperial

capitalism. Churches were dull, boring, & unenlightened and needed radical reformation,

which is why the ‘NEW AGE OF AQUARIUS’ practiced and prospered so well.

       People came out of the frying pan and into the fire, meaning that the evils of the

churches were abandoned to embrace the evils of the colleges and corporations. People

liked having houses, cars, & material possessions and the only way to beat the system

was to join the system. With no more protests or rebellions, EVERYONE in America

submitted to the financial system – a financial system that was supposedly intended to
free us and make us independent, only to make slaves out of all of us – a common theme

repeated among hippies during the great rebellion against the Vietnam War.

       So back to College we went, signing our souls, our lives, our properties, and our

possessions to the super banks, first by going into student loan debt, then by signing

‘RENTAL/MORTGAGE AGREEMENTS’ coming under the guise of making you feel

‘independent’ and ‘responsible’ because of your AGREEMENT/COVENANT to pay

back the bank what you owe them. We signed paperwork at the car dealership agreeing

to make monthly payments to the car company banks for vehicles that cost too much for

us to pay with one bulk sum – vehicles that only ‘the rich’ could afford.

       But now, poor people can now own nice cars by going into debt.

       The Church pulpits could now be filled, but only when ordinary poor people

desired to ‘go to College’ thus going to Seminaries that cost $20,000 a year to go to and

so we would need FEDERAL STUDENT LOAN AID to pay for such an ‘education.’

       Do you see the conclusion I have arrived at about our precious capitalist


       The conclusion is that the beast has been setting up his kingdom through your

local banks, schools, & churches since the Rockefellers started gaining power & control

over Church & State. Mankind has been pimped out with a ‘better life’ through a

business suit and tie so that even modern Muslims are wearing a corporate suit and tie.

Seeing the leaders of Iraq and Afghanistan wearing suits and ties, appears like a

wonderful advancement for a barbaric civilization that thrives on terrorism in the Name

of Allah to survive, however, the hatred becomes more intense, because now Muslims
have become the future hippies of the world, the only people really rebelling and fighting

against imperial capitalism on a violent level.

       In mass, the majority of the world’s inhabitants hates the governments that have

been imposed upon us and our forced submission to the ‘governing authorities’ & ‘laws’

that have been imposed upon us for our enslavement rather than protection.

       Many Church pulpits are now preaching that homeless people are all just a bunch

of drug users, alchohol abusers, insane lunatics who got released from a mental

institution and only through ‘our social programs’ can we save the homeless who aren’t

mentally ill and are seeking to work so that they can cure themselves of poverty.

       Aren’t homeless people all a bunch of bumbs that we shouldn’t give any money

to? What if I told you that the narrow path that leads to heaven can only be found among

the poor, the needy, and the homeless and that the secret to your freedom is by giving up

everything to follow Jesus. What? Huh? What if I told you that in order to become a

true Christian you would have to sell everything you have and give, not just your material

possessions to the poor, but your whole body, soul, mind, and spirit?

       What will it cost you to follow Jesus? Everything.

       Think about it. When you die, you can’t take anything with you beyond the grave

except your soul and so you will not be carrying anything material with you beyond the

grave and so before your physical body dies, you must ‘die in Christ’. When you follow

Jesus, death to yourself becomes your life.

       The world teaches salvation to yourself through your own efforts, but you do not

realize that you have become a human battery feeding the economic beast’s fat belly

while you starve to death for FREEDOM.
        Do homeless people have the keys of the Kingdom of Heaven?

        I am not talking about drug users, alchohol abusers, or lunatics who are more

numerous among the rich, the wealthy, & the middle class than among the poor.

        Some of you might critique my life and ask: “Why didn’t you go to College and


        There are several answers to this question:

   1.      The God of Israel had different plans for me as an author and as a Pastor

   2.      The Lord wanted me OUTSIDE THE SYSTEM to learn about the virtues of

           the Gospel

   3.      I am no greater and no lesser than those who went to College and made a life

           for themselves

   4.      I just couldn’t see the logic of being a prisoner of the BANK forever and ever

           until death do I part

        Really we are programmed from our days in Grammar School, Junior High, and

High School when our teachers told us that we should get good grades so we can go to

the College of our choice.

        When we are old enough for love and marriage at PUBERTY, we are told we

must wait until our twenties to marry, settle down, and have kids, because we must first

GO TO COLLEGE and we can only dream of marriage until DURING OR AFTER

COLLEGE is completed.

        Although we could marry as teenagers, our lives as teenagers were reduced to a

minimum wage paycheck which would really only pay for our stereos, our bicycles, our

music & videos, and perhaps a computer a few months down the road. So we go from 13
to basically 26, experiencing 13 years of biological frustration and tension through pre-

marital sex, never knowing if we will make it through College or not.


       We have spoken a lot about FREEDOM in America and that we are better than



       What if you have no family contribution?

       What if you have $0.00 and average High School grades?

       They preach to us: Go to Junior College and get transfer credits.

       Okay, so from 18 to 21 I will go to Junior College and get transfer credits, taking

out a Grant which will pay for a third of my education and then the rest is taken on a


       After that I can transfer to a University or a College by taking out MORE BANK

LOANS, which will cost me $1,000 a month after graduation.


       This doesn’t apply to everyone, because some people will be able to put

themselves through College and MAKE IT ON THEIR OWN. Good for them. But they

are only a small fraction.

       Yes, BECOMING A PRISONER TO DEBT by taking out a College Loan. If this

isn’t enough, after COLLEGE DEBT, you will have to get a car with car insurance. No

longer can you just buy a car and have no insurance! You have to get CAR

INSURANCE! After your car purchase, probably made during College out of LOAN
DEBT, you will then have to pay $1.50 to $2.50 a gallon for gas to travel 25 to 50 miles a

day to either work or school.

       Then you get married and either RENT AN APARTMENT or MORTGAGE A

HOUSE. Then you have credit cards, utilities, and water bills. Let’s not forget that you

need health insurance, dental insurance, fire insurance, earthquake insurance, flood


       When you have kids, you must start the cycle all over again of saving up for

THEIR COLLEGE EDUCATION so they won’t end up being as miserable as you were

and more “DEBT FREE”.





       Ask homeless people throughout the world what they think of THE SYSTEM and

they will give you a much different story than those who BELIEVE IN THE


       Speaking from experience of being OUTSIDE THE SYSTEM, I believe that

COLLEGE HAS BECOME ONE BIG PRISON for those of us who couldn’t get around

getting BANK LOANS. To me, a BANK LOAN is like accepting the mark of the beast –

putting your life into slavery for the MASONIC PYRAMID printed on the back of the

ONE dollar bill.

       We weren’t educated thoroughly about THE SYSTEM in our High School years

and because we were trapped in the prison of PUBLIC EDUCATION which we all
dreaded in our teens, we really didn’t mind being transferred from one prison to the next,

especially those of us whose parents PAID FOR OUR COLLEGE EDUCATION.

       When white people grew smart, the BANKERS went after the poor foreigners,

advertising and commercializing that the KEY TO AMERICAN FREEDOM IS A

COLLEGE EDUCATION and with countless smiles that a COLLEGE PRISON was

better than the COMMUNISTIC prison of their foreign country, they surrendered,

adapted, conformed, and infiltrated American Society and TOOK THE JOBS FROM


       Remember that diversity was never promoted because of “Biblical Principle” but


AMERICA DOWN on a corporate level. Many corporate think tanks from THE CLUB

OF ROME figured out a way to bring America down, and in 2000 to 2004 we saw their

pyramid scheme climax in their destruction of the American Economy.

       The more foreigners who came into America, the more the American citizen

would be destroyed. When you wake up one day and realize that your cubicle or your

stable job is NOT THE REAL WORLD, you will find yourselves in the movie called

THE MATRIX where Keanu Reeves discovers his world to be one big computer program

operated by robots.

       This will be your life under AMERICAN CAPITALISM and THE ONLY WAY

OUT OF SUCH A SYSTEM is to join the poor, the needy, and the homeless, you know,

that place that foreigners sought so desperately to escape from their own countries so they

could survive here in this “wealthy and prosperous nation”.
       Ask yourselves, why did College get forced into our lives without our notice?

Why did we so blindly not question the BANKING SYSTEM and surrender our whole

lives to PAYING THEM BACK? Why are we being “GOOD, RESPONSIBLE


OWE THEM? Do we really OWE the banks our lives? When we sign the contract, yes!

You cannot file BANKRUPTCY ON SCHOOL LOAN DEBT! Everything else can be

filed for bankruptcy, except SCHOOL LOAN DEBT! Interesting huh?

       Now if you have made it smoothly through THE SYSTEM, none of this will

make any sense to you, because you might have already achieved “THE AMERICAN

DREAM” for yourselves without a care or a clue in the world, like my relatives who have

all lived in denial that there is another world outside of their own and that they have

surrendered their souls and their children to A SYSTEM THAT IS ONE HUGE


       Well, we have no other choice do we? We have to WORK HARD and if we just

work REAL HARD we CAN MAKE IT! Make it to what?

       You spend perhaps 15 years on yourselves, MAKING IT, only to start over again

with your children and so your lifelong achievement is putting them through College.

       This is all we have. This is our life from start to finish. We are taught

competition and how to rise to the top, not realizing that according to the Gospel, it is the

poor, the needy, the hungry and the homeless who are rich and not those whose lives are

surrendered to making piles and pyramids of ONE DOLLAR BILLS.
        I have written a Biblical essay or two with the following Scriptures in mind on

how God views poor, needy, & destitute people and this is what the Bible says about




   1. 1 John 3:17 – “If anyone has material possessions and sees his brother in need,

        but has no pity on him, how can the love of God be in him?”

   2. James 2:5 – “Has not God chosen those who are poor in the eyes of the world to

        be rich in faith and to inherit the kingdom he promised?”

   3. Luke 12:22-28 – “Do not worry about your life, what you will eat; or about your

        body, what you will wear. Life is more than food, and the body more than

        clothes. Consider the ravens: They do not sow or reap, they have no storeroom or

        barn; yet God feeds them. And how much more valuable you are than birds!

        Who of you by worrying can add a single hour to his life? Since you can’t do this

        very little thing, why do you worry about the rest? Consider how the lilies grow.

        They do no labor or spin. Yet I tell you that not even Solomon in all his splendor

        was dressed like one of these. Do not set your heart on what you will eat or drink;

        do not worry about it. For the pagan world runs after all such things, and your

        Father knows that you need them. But seek his kingdom and these things will be

        given to you as well. Do not be afraid, for God has been pleased to give you the

        Kingdom. Sell your possessions and give to the poor. Provide purses for

        yourselves that will not wear out, a treasure in heaven that will not be exhausted,
   where no thief comes near and no moth destroys. For where your treasure is,

   there your heart will be also.”

4. Romans 15:26 – “For Macedonia and Achaia were pleased to make a contribution

   for the poor among the saints in Jerusalem. They were pleased to do it, and

   indeed THEY OWE IT TO THEM. For if the Gentiles have shared in the Jews’

   spiritual blessings, THE OWE IT TO THE JEWS to share with them their

   material blessings.”

5. 2 Corinthians 8:9 – “For you know the grace of our Lord Jesus Messiah, that

   though he was rich, yet for your sakes he became poor, so that you through his

   poverty might become rich.”

6. Galatians 2:10 – “All they asked was that we should continue to remember the

   poor, the very thing I was eager to do.”

7. Matthew 8:20 – “Foxes have holes and the birds of the air have nests, but the Son

   of Man has no place to lay his head.”

8. Matthew 5:3 – “Blessed are the poor in spirit.”

9. Isaiah 61:1 – “The Spirit of the Sovereign Lord is on me, because he has anointed

   me to preach good news to the poor. He has sent me to bind up the


10. Matthew 11:5 – “The good news is preached to the poor.”

11. Matthew 19:20-23 – “What do I still lack?” the young man asked. Jesus

   answered, “If you want to be perfect, go, sell your possessions and give to the

   poor, and you will have treasure in heaven. Then come, follow me.” When the

   young man heard this, he walked away sad because he had great wealth. Jesus
   said to his disciples, “I tell you the truth, it is hard for a rich man to enter the

   kingdom of heaven. Again I tell you, it is easier for a camel to go through the eye

   of a needle than it is for a rich man to enter the kingdom of God.”

12. Mark 12:42-43 – “A poor widow came and put in two very small copper coins,

   worth only a fraction of a penny. Calling his disciples to him, Jesus said, “I tell

   you the truth, this poor widow has put more into the treasury than all the others.

   They all gave out of their wealth; but she, out of her poverty, put in everything—

   all she had to live on.”

13. Luke 6:20 – “Blessed are you who are poor, for yours is the kingdom of heaven.”

14. Luke 6:35 – “Love your enemies, do good to them, and lend to them without

   expecting to get anything back. Then your reward will be great.”

15. Matthew 6:2 – “When you give to the needy, do not announce it with trumpets.

   Do not let your right hand know what your left hand is doing so that your giving

   may be in secret.”

16. Acts 9:36 – “In Joppa, there was a disciple named Tabitha who was always doing

   good and helping the poor.”

17. Acts 2:44-45 – “All the believers were together and had everything in common.

   Selling their possessions and goods, they gave to anyone as he had need.”

18. Luke 14:13 – “When you give a banquet, invite the poor, the crippled, the lame,

   the blind, and you will be blessed. Although they cannot repay you, you will be

   repaid at the resurrection of the righteous.”
19. Psalm 12:5 – “Because of the oppression of the weak and the groaning of the

   needy, I will now arise says the Lord. I will protect them from those who malign


20. Psalm 13:4 – “My enemy will say, ‘I have overcome him,’ and my foes will

   rejoice when I fall.’ But I trust in your unfailing love, my heart rejoices in your


21. Psalm 14:6 – “You evildoers frustrate the plans of the poor, but the Lord is their


22. Psalm 34:4-7 – “I sought the Lord and he answered me; he delivered me from all

   my fears. Those who look to him are radiant; their faces are never covered with

   shame. This poor man called, and the Lord heard him; he saved him from all his

   troubles. The angel of the Lord encamps around those who fear him.”

23. Psalm 35:10 – “You rescue the poor from those too strong for them, the poor and

   needy from those who rob them.”

24. Psalm 40:17 – “I am poor and needy; may the Lord think of me.”

25. Psalm 68:10 – “From your bounty O God, you provided for the poor.”

26. Psalm 82:3-4 – “Maintain the rights of the poor and oppressed. Rescue the weak

   and needy; deliver them from the hand of the wicked.”

27. Psalm 112:9 – “He has scattered abroad his gifts to the poor.”

28. Psalm 113:7 – “God raises the poor from the dust and lifts the needy from the ash

   heap. He seats them with princes, with the princes of their people.”

29. Psalm 18:18 – “They confronted me in the day of my disaster, but the Lord was

   my support.”
30. 1 Timothy 5:8 – “If anyone does not provide for his relatives and especially his

   immediate family, he has denied the faith and is worse than an unbeliever.”

31. Ecclesiastes 1:2 & 14– “Meaningless! Meaningless! Utterly meaningless!

   Everything is meaningless! I have seen all things done under the sun; all of them

   are meaningless, a chasing after the wind.”

32. Ecclesiastes 2:2 –“Laughter is foolish and what does pleasure accomplish?”

33. Ecclesiastes 2:17 – “So I hated life, because the work that is done under the sun

   was grievous to me. All of it is meaningless, a chasing after the wind. I hated all

   things I had toiled for under the sun. My heart began to despair over all my

   toilsome labor under the sun. What does a man get for all the toil and anxious

   striving with which he labors under the sun? All his days his work is pain and

   grief; even at night his mind does not rest. This too is meaningless. A man can

   do nothing better than eat and drink and find satisfaction in his work. This too, I

   see is from the hand of God, for without him, who can find enjoyment?”

34. Ecclesiastes 4:1 – “I saw the tears of the oppressed and they have no comforter;

   power was on the side of their oppressors—and they have no comforter.”

35. Ecclesiastes 4:6 – “Better one handful with tranquility than two handfuls with toil

   and chasing after the wind.”

36. Ecclesiastes 4:13 – “Better a poor but wise youth than an old but foolish king who

   no longer knows how to take warning.”

37. Ecclesiastes 5:8-15 – “If you see the poor oppressed in a district, and justice and

   rights denied, do not be surprised at such things; for one official is eyed by a

   higher one and over them both are others higher still. The increase from the land
   is taken by all; the king himself profits from the fields. Whoever loves money

   never has money enough; whoever loves wealth is never satisfied with his

   income. This too is meaningless. Naked a man comes from his mother’s womb,

   and as he comes, so he departs. He takes nothing from his labor that he can carry

   in his hand.”

38. Ecclesiastes 6:7-9 –“All man’s efforts are for his mouth, yet his appetite is never

   satisfied. What advantage does a wise man have over a fool? What does a poor

   man gain by knowing how to conduct himself before others?”

39. Ecclesiastes 9:11—“The race is not to the swift or the battle to the strong, nor

   does food come to the wise or wealth to the brilliant or favor to the learned; but

   time and chance happen to them all.”

40. Ecclesiastes 9:15—“Now there lived in that city a man poor but wise, and he

   saved the city by his wisdom. But nobody remembered that poor man. Wisdom

   is better than strength. But a poor man’s wisdom is despised and his words no

   longer heeded.”

41. Ecclesiastes 10:6 – “Fools are put in many high positions, while the rich occupy

   the low ones. I have seen slaves on horseback, while princes go on foot like


42. Proverbs 13:7 –“One man pretends to be rich, yet has nothing; another pretends to

   be poor, yet has great wealth.”

43. Proverbs 13:8 – “A man’s riches may ransom his life, but a poor man hears no

44. Proverbs 14:31 – “He who oppresses the poor shows contempt for their Maker,

   but whoever is kind to the needy honors God.”

45. Proverbs 17:1 –“Better a dry crust with peace and quiet than a house full of

   feasting and strife.”

46. Proverbs 18:23 – “A poor man pleads for mercy, but a rich man answers harshly.”

47. Proverbs 19:1 –“Better a poor man whose walk is blameless than a fool whose

   lips are perverse.”

48. Proverbs 19:4 – “Wealth brings many friends, but a poor man’s friend deserts


49. Proverbs 19:7 – “A poor man is shunned by all his relatives—how much more do

   his friends avoid him! Though he pursues them with pleading, they are nowhere

   to be found.”

50. Proverbs 19:17 – “He who is kind to the poor lends to the Lord, and he will

   reward him for what he has done.”

51. Proverbs 19:22 – “What a man desires is unfailing love; better to be poor than a


52. Proverbs 19:21—“Many are the plans in a man’s heart, but it is the Lord’s

   purpose that prevails.”

53. Proverbs 21:13 –“If a man shuts his ear to the cry of the poor, he too will cry out

   and not be answered.”

54. Proverbs 22:2—“Rich and poor have this in common: The Lord is Maker of them

55. Proverbs 23:4-5—“Do not wear yourself out to get rich; have the wisdom to show

   restraint. Cast but a glance at riches and they are gone, for they will surely sprout

   wings and fly off to the sky like an eagle.”

56. Proverbs 23:6-7—“Do not eat the food of a stingy man, do not crave his

   delicacies; for he is the kind of man who is always thinking about the cost.”

57. Deuteronomy 15:7—“If there is a poor man among your brothers in any of the

   towns of the land that the Lord your God is giving you, do not be hardhearted or

   tightfisted toward your poor brother. Rather be open-handed and freely lend him

   whatever he needs. Give generously to him and do so without a grudging heart;

   then because of this the Lord your God will bless you in all your work and

   everything you put your hand to. There will always be poor people in the land.

   Therefore I command you to be open-handed towards your brothers and toward

   the poor and needy in your land.”

58. Deuteronomy 15:7 – “If there is a poor man among your brothers in any of the

   towns of the land that the Lord your God is giving you, do not be hardhearted or

   tightfisted toward your poor brother. Rather be open-handed and freely lend him

   whatever he needs. Give generously to him and do so without a grudging heart;

   then because of this the Lord your God will bless you in all your work and

   everything you put your hand to. There will always be poor people in the land.

   Therefore I command you to be open-handed toward your brothers and toward the

   poor and needy in your land.”
59. Job 5:11-16 – “The lowly God sets on high, and those who mourn are lifted to

   safety. He saves the needy from the sword in their mouth; he saves them from the

   clutches of the powerful. So the poor have hope, and injustice shuts its mouth.”

60. Romans 4:5-6 –“However, to the man who does not work, but trusts God who

   justifies the wicked, his faith is credited as righteousness. God credits

   righteousness apart from work.”

61. 1 Corinthians 3:11-15 – “For no one can lay any foundation other than the one

   already laid, which is Jesus Messiah. If any man builds on this foundation using

   gold, silver, costly stones, wood, hay or straw, his work will be shown for what it

   is, because the Day will bring it to light. It will be revealed with fire and FIRE


   survives he will receive his reward. If it is burned up, he will suffer loss; he

   himself will be saved, but only as one escaping through the flames.”

62. John 14:6 – “I am THE WAY, THE TRUTH, and THE LIFE. No one comes to

   God except through me. If you really knew me you would know God as well.

   From now on you do know him and have seen him.”

63. John 10 – “I am THE GATE. Whoever enters through me will be saved.”

64. Matthew 6:19-24 –“Do not store up for yourselves treasures on earth, where moth

   and rust destroy and where thieves break in and steal. But store up for yourselves

   treasures in heaven. For where your treasure is there your heart will be also.


65. 1 Timothy 6:6-10 says-“But godliness with contentment is great gain. For we

   brought nothing into the world, and we can take nothing out of it. But if we have
   food and clothing we will be content with that. People who want to get rich fall

   into temptation and a trap and into many foolish and harmful desires that plunge

   men into ruin and destruction. For THE LOVE OF MONEY is a root of all kinds

   of evil. Some people, eager for money, have wandered from the faith and pierced

   themselves with many griefs.”

66. Ezekiel 28:1-5 – “In the pride of your heart you say, ‘I am a god; I sit on the

   throne of a god in the heart of the seas.’ But you are but men and women, and not

   a god, though you think you are as wise as a god. By your wisdom and

   understanding you have gained wealth for yourself and amassed gold and silver in

   your treasuries. By your great skill and trading you have increased your wealth

   and because of your wealth, your heart has grown proud.”

67. 1 John 2:15-17 – “Do not love the world or anything in the world. If anyone

   loves the world, the love of the Father is not in him. For everything in the

   world—the cravings of sinful man, the lust of his eyes and the boasting of what he

   has and does—comes not from God but from the world. The world and its desires

   pass away, but the man who does the will of God lives forever.”

68. Matthew 4:2-4—“After fasting 40 days and 40 nights, Jesus was hungry. The

   tempter came to him and said, ‘If you are the Messiah of God, tell these stones to

   become bread.’ Jesus answered, ‘It is written: Man does not live on bread alone,

   but on every word that comes from the mouth of God.’”

69. John 6:35 – “Jesus said, ‘I am the bread of life. He who comes to me will never

   go hungry, and he who believes in me will never be thirsty.”
70. Matthew 11:28-29 – “Come to me, all you who are weary and burdened, and I

   will give you rest. Take my yoke upon you and learn from me, for I am gentle

   and humble in heart, and you will find rest for your souls. For my yoke is easy

   and my burden is light.”

71. James 5:1-6 – “Now listen, you rich people, weep and wail because of the misery

   that is coming upon you. Your wealth has rotted and moths have eaten your

   clothes. Your gold and silver are corroded. Their corrosion will testify against

   you and eat your flesh like fire. You have hoarded wealth in the last days. Look!

   The wages you failed to pay the workmen who mowed your fields are crying out

   against you. The cries of the harvesters have reached the ears of the Lord

   Almighty. You have lived on earth in luxury and self-indulgence. You have

   fattened yourselves in the day of slaughter.”

72. Mark 9:49-50 –“Everyone will be salted with fire. Have salt in yourselves, and be

   at peace with each other.”

73. Matthew 10:39 –“Whoever finds his life will lose it and whoever loses his life for

   my sake will find it.”

74. Revelation 21:6—“To him who is thirsty I will give to drink WITHOUT COST

   from the spring of the water of life. He who overcomes will inherit all this, and I

   will be his God and he will be my son.”

75. Revelation 22:17—“Whoever is thirsty let him come; and whoever wishes, let

   him take the free gift of the water of life.”

What is the current ‘EDUCATION’ teaching us?
   Our current Educational institutions are teaching us something straight from the book

entitled: ACRES OF DIAMONDS: A Modern Adaptation of the Classic Message by

Russell Conwell.


“I say that you ought to get rich, and it is your duty to get rich. How many of my pious

brothers say to me, ‘Do you a Christian minister, spend your time going up and down the

country advising young people to get rich, to get money?” “Yes, of course I do.” They

say, “Isn’t that awful! Why don’t you preach the gospel instead of preaching about

money?” “Because to make money honestly is to preach the gospel.”

“Says another young man, “I hear sometimes of men that get millions of dollars

dishonestly.” Yes, of course you do, and so do I. But they are so rare a thing, in fact,

that the newspapers talk about them all the time as a matter of news until you get the idea

that all other rich men got rich dishonestly.


My friend, you take and drive me—if you furnish the auto—out unto the suburbs of

Philadelphia, and introduce me to the people who own their own homes around this great

city, those beautiful homes with gardens and flowers, those magnificent homes so lovely

in their art, and I will introduce you to the very best people in character as well as an

enterprise in our city. For a man to have money, even in large sums, is not an

inconsistent thing. We preach against covetousness, and you know we do, in the pulpit,
and oftentimes preach against it so long and use the terms about ‘filthy lucre’ so

extremely that Christians get the idea that when we stand in the pulpit we believe it is

wicked for any man to have money—until the collection basket goes around, and then we

almost swear at the people because they don’t give more money. Oh, the inconsistency

of such doctrines as that. ‘MONEY IS POWER, AND YOU OUGHT TO BE

REASONABLY AMBITIOUS TO HAVE IT!” You ought because you can do more

good with it than you could do without it. MONEY printed your Bible, MONEY builds

your churches, MONEY sends your missionaries, and MONEY pays your preachers, and

you would not have many of them, either, if you did not PAY THEM. I am always

willing that my Church should raise my salary, because the church that pays the largest

salary always raises it the easiest…I say then you ought to have money. If you can

honestly attain unto riches in Philadelphia, it is YOUR CHRISITAN AND GODLY

DUTY to do so. It is an awful mistake of these pious people to think that you must be

awfully poor in order to be pious.”


used in Masonic doctrine quite frequently, so it is possible that this author may have had

Masonic connections to preach like this.] “Money is POWER, Money is FORCE,

MONEY will do good as well as harm. In the hands of good men and women it could

accomplish, and it has accomplished, good.”

“One of the best things in our life is when a young man has earned his own living, and

when he becomes engaged to some lovely young woman, and makes up his mind to have
a home of his own. Then with that same love comes also that divine inspiration toward

better things, and he begins to save his money. He begins to leave off his bad habits and

put money in the bank. When he has a few hundred dollars he goes out in the suburbs to

look for a home. He goes to the savings bank, perhaps, for half of the value, and then

goes for his wife; and when he takes his bride over the threshold of that door for the first

time, he says in words of eloquence my voice can never touch: ‘I HAVE EARNED THIS


grandest moment a human heart may ever know.”

“I pity the rich man’s sons UNLESS they have THE GOOD SENSE OF THE ELDER

VANDERBILT, which sometimes happens.” [NOTE: This reference to VANDERBILT

is a most notable example of where this so-called ‘Christian preacher’ got his philosophy

of wealth.]




       Authors like Rick Warren who wrote THE PURPOSE DRIVEN LIFE and THE

PURPOSE DRIVEN CHURCH, and PASTOR Joel Olsteen who authored: YOUR BEST


good intentions for how Christians should survive WITHIN THE SYSTEM, but they will

never teach about rebellion against the current or historical authorities of the global
economy, and instead will teach you about submission to the governing authorities WITH

A POSITIVE ATTITUDE. Somehow, your PURPOSE is to choose a CAREER or

EDUCATIONAL path, being dependent on modern programs and institutions, churches

and schools, to improve your life so that you can not be depressed and have a positive,

joyful attitude, rather than a sad and miserable attitude.

       I could narrow down all of mankind’s problems to just one SELFISH DRIVEN


       The old school submission to the Rockefeller Treasury Department system has to

be something that is rebelled against and not submitted to. Someone as simple as

Ghandi, although he was not a Christian, rebelled against the British Monarchy, would

rather starve to death than submit to the British government or use violence as a means to

overthrow the British monarchy in their land.

       Americans fought hard to get away from the British monarchy of Europe and the

oppressive Catholic Churches of Europe. Basic pilgrims acknowledged that ALL LAND

BELONGS TO GOD, THE CREATOR and shared the land with the Indians, giving

thanks to the Creator for their new found freedom in an open land that was FREE as God

ordained it.

       Unfortunately, what the pioneers and framers of the American constitution sought


wealthy aristocrats who organized a new financial system that would become just as

oppressive as the monarchies of Europe once were.

       To state that capitalism is better than communism or socialism is an

understatement, but it does not mean that capitalism, as the Rockefellers and their
banking associates created, has liberated us from an oppressive government that has

taken away our rights and freedoms to our own property and possessions. In fact, our

current financial system VIOLATES EVERY ONE OF GOD’S LAWS IN EVERY


       Think about this:

       THERE IS NO MONEY IN HEAVEN. There are no banks in heaven. God have

given everyone a mansion, without cost. We are free to eat and drink without cost.

Everyone shares land, property, and possessions because GOD IS THE OWNER and


ALONE. The SATANIC idea of SELF-SUFFICIENCY never came from God because

God wants all of us to depend on Him, rather than ourselves. God will richly provide us

with everything for our enjoyment and ALL LAND BELONGS TO HIM. If we gave up

on the current SYSTEM and glorified God by sharing all land and resources, providing

for those who work and don’t work FOR FREE, without calling anything ours, we would

be in conformity with God’s Will and Purpose.

       Your PURPOSE in life is to REJECT THE WORLD, GAIN YOUR SOUL, not to

accept, nor conform the world and loose your soul.

       We need to be very careful about prosperity faith preachers and not fall into the

trap of dependency upon others; dependency upon Churches; dependency upon banks;

dependency upon schools; dependency on money to become our material salvation. At

death, the material world will fade away and our souls must be liberated with a new body

that only our Creator can provide. Those who overcome the world will inherit Eternal

Life. A time is coming soon when the true Christians will have to just say, ‘NO!’ to
every authority on earth and be labeled as terrorists before the coming wrath against the

beast’s kingdom is fully unleashed.

       Today, we can continue working for our material possessions as we have families

and children to provide for and we must work within the system to survive, FOR NOW.

But when this economic beast has become too much, we will have to forsake our lives,

our property, our families and our sacred fortunes for a NEW CONSTITUTION as

prescribed by the Bible for the last days saints.

       I am Dr. Robin Loxley, and I am fed up with the current monarchies that are

tyrannical and unmerciful within their legal policies which are considered Biblically

illegal. I think we need to start another HIPPIE REVOLUTION and practice non-

conformity to the rulers, the authorities and the powers of this dark world.

       When the Bush Administration has ended and the Democratic Demons take over

for the final tyranny of planet earth, we must stay true to the Gospel and realize that our

PURPOSE is to die in Christ, just as the JESUS FREAKS mentioned in the three

volumes of DC TALK did.

       We can be grateful to God for the simple things in life we get to enjoy and praise

him for the opportunity to survive in this current corporate culture, however, the time has

come for all of us to say NO! TO THE WORLD and YES! To Jesus Christ’s Coming


       Satan is indeed ruling the world today and the fallen angels are all laughing

together in their great rebellion as many souls are convinced that their philosophies are

better than Biblical virtues. If you think that Heaven would ever oppress you, think

again, for the power of your liberation is Jesus Christ and you will learn that all who died
in His Name are now in Eternity with the Creator of the universe where the evil one can

never harm nor tempt them again. In this world, Satan’s work is done through SELF-


LIFE is being taught everywhere so that SELF is worshipped above and beside God.

       There is no doubt that Satan is the god of the financial world and the total chaos

that accompanies his primitive and barbaric ways of thinking about our salvation cannot

compare with God’s Plan for our Freedom and Salvation.

       Today, you can learn about the Peace of Jesus Christ by learning how to be a

rebel with a purpose – a purpose where you go with Jesus to pray in lonely places away

from the public’s eye; a purpose where all of your family and friends abandon you when

you choose non-conformity rather than conformity; a purpose beyond this life and this

world in which you are the Church and Jesus is the Head of your Church. By rejecting

this world you will gain your soul.

       Now it’s back to taking care of our children and filtering them through the

MATRIX where the energy of human batteries is feeding the hungry beast and making

him fatter and fatter until you are vomited from the earth and there is nothing left of you

but gooey mush. All of our bodies are destined for dirt, dust, & ashes and all that we will

have left on Judgment Day is our soul’s answer to Jesus Christ and how His Answers to

us shined out in the decisions we made on earth of choosing which God we wanted to

serve forever.

       Did we choose the God where every religious path led to the same one, or did we

choose Jesus Christ who is the only Way to God. MONEY is not your Salvation; Jesus

Christ is your salvation and the only path to God. When the POWER OF THE HOLY
PEOPLE has been finally broken in the near future, all the things of Revelation shall be

completed, so you will either join the world or choose to rebel against it, content with

nothing and no one more than Jesus in your heart. Whether you live or die, Jesus Christ

is your life and we must all be dependent upon Him for our personal salvation and walk

with Him.


       Stay outside the camp, as Jesus did with his twelve disciples and acknowledge

that just as Jesus was abandoned during his darkest hour, you too, might be abandoned.

But for all those who are forsaken and abandoned in this world filled with barbaric rules

and laws that the beast is enforcing upon our lives, God shall remember them first in His

Coming Kingdom. Those who were first in this life will be last in Heaven while those

who were last on this earth will be first in Heaven.

       Will you reject College and Church to follow Jesus Christ today?

       Will you quit relying on friends and family for your Salvation, even yourself, to

rely upon Jesus for every answer to every problem that you have?

       Will you join the poor, the needy, the broken-hearted, instead of the rich, the

wealthy, the powerful, the educated?

       Will you forsake marriage?

       Will you forsake your family and children?

       Will you forsake secular education or even religious education?

       Will you suffer in this world with a smile or let the beast get the best of you?

       Will you die in Christ or die a millionaire?
         What do you really think God’s Will and Purpose is for us when it comes to the

financial system? Did God really create the financial system or did men? Should we join

Jesus Christ in Eternity or forsake Eternity for pleasures that are as fleeting and decaying

as our own bodies, which only God can resurrect?

         MONEY IS NOT POWER. MONEY is invented by man. God’s purpose is for

you to be freed from the slavery that comes from the financial system and the narrow gate

that leads to Eternal Life is Jesus Christ who told all Christians not to worship Caesar, but

to worship Him as God. We can continue to give to Satan what is Satan’s and there will

be no substance we can cling to, but if we can continue to give to God what is God’s, the

power of the enemy in our lives will be broken and we will have everlasting joy, comfort,

hope, and peace in knowing that Jesus, who is in us, is greater than the one who is in the


         As for you, find someone who is poor, needy, homeless and broken and bring

healing to them with your time, your love, your compassion, and your attentive ears.

         Do not be like some of my deaf relatives and judge other people as being lazy,

drunkards, cowards, or irresponsible, for someone just like me might be begging at your

doorstep for some food, clothing, shelter, or just a kind word of instruction from the

Gospel that is spoken with no motivation other than their salvation.

         Do not save the world with money; save the world with the love of Jesus Christ.

Follow the narrow path that leads to Eternal life and care not what the world thinks of

you. Care only about what God thinks of you and do not build up your SELF-ESTEEM

on this world’s praise of you through various pieces of paper that mention you graduated

through their courses and programs and have become a somebody as a result of your
financial contribution to make their coffers fatter for their big fat heads, rather, praise

Jesus and let Him write your Name in His Book of Eternal Life.

        Remember this: Jesus will not ask you where you went to College, how much

money you saved for yourself in the bank, what your career was, what kind of house you

lived in, what kind of car you drove, what you achieved with your Degree, or what you

mastered. He will ask you how you responded to Him on earth when called to Heaven’s

purpose. I don’t think any of us will be able to answer him, and like Job, we will all

falter in challenging God’s Wisdom and Authority. Like Isaiah we will all answer, “Woe

to me! I am ruined! For I am a person of unclean lips and I lived among a people of

unclean lips.”

        When we see the face of God will we have reflected His Glory in Jesus Christ or

the Glory of the Pyramids of slavery found on the back of our ONE DOLLAR BILL?

        Choose today which God you will serve and remember that your sadness and

misery does not come from your defeat in this world, but because of the Ephesians 6

authorities who established their doctrine all around you. The only way to overcome

them is with the ARMOR OF GOD mentioned in Ephesians 6.

       When you are a child and a teenager who has good parents that provide for you,

you kind of get a taste of what Heaven is like in having all your needs, wants and

concerns met without having to work for it, or earn it, or pay for it. You depend on your

parents who virtually give you everything you want and need because they love you.

Most people growing up are somehow fooled into thinking that this is somehow a bad

thing and that you can’t feel like a fulfilled person unless you PAY for everything on

your own, but what most fooled people don’t understand is that PAYING FOR

EVERYTHING ON YOUR OWN does not make you a more fulfilled or independent

person. It only means that everyone has allowed themselves to become another SOCIAL

SECURITY NUMBER. It is sad, but true, that we have all been conditioned through

secular education to become so dependent upon the financial system that we have

virtually blinded ourselves to the fact that once we move from our parents, we are

exchanging our biological parents for CORPORATE PARENTS who provide our

paychecks as we slave for them.

       We used to think that somehow parental authority was a bad thing and for those

who have verbally or physically abusive parents, parental authority is a bad thing, but for

those with good parents who are loving, caring, and protective parental authority is not

such a bad thing. When we grow up, we exchange parental authority for corporate

authority, relying on a company and the bank to provide for us and that is THE

SYSTEM. You are fooled into thinking that just because you move from your parents

you are somehow making it on your own and being independent, when in fact, you are
becoming a slave to banks and corporations, which are not helping you to be free and

independent at all!

       The secular schools and colleges do whatever they can to de-program young

people from the free mindset that comes with depending on your parents who lovingly

provide you with food, clothing, shelter, basic needs, and even gifts – all of which are

under no cost or obligation to you whatsoever.

       In Heaven, God created angels and angels depended on God to provide them with

everything they ever wanted or needed. God gave them a perfect Paradise. Heaven was

created Holy by a Holy Creator Who reigned in Righteousness. Since God was and is the

Holy Creator of Heaven, angels did not need to be independent or provide for themselves.

Just as loving parents gladly provided their children with everything, God provided

angels with everything at no cost or obligation. God gave them everything in the

universe, except His own Throne.

       All that God demanded from His angels was respect and reverence for Him and

His Throne and that’s the one thing Lucifer wanted to take from God for himself – the

one thing he should not have. It was God’s Adversary who brought war into a peaceful

Heaven and out of pride and self-worship, he chose to no longer respect the Throne of

Him who created everyone and everything.

       It was not a matter of whether Lucifer could have his own throne, but whether he

should have his own throne. Lucifer became God’s Adversary, Satan (which means

adversary of God). As a result of God expelling him and those who followed him out of

Heaven, God’s Adversary would wage war against His Father and all who followed His
Holy Will. The Adversary and his followers would wage rebellion and war against

everything called: GOD.

       So as we see the rise of the beast’s kingdom all around us today through the

MONEY SYSTEM without which no one can buy or sell unless they have accepted his

financial mark in their foreheads and hands, we are seeing a system which virtually

imitates Lucifer’s rebellion against God. This system of PRIDE in SELF-sufficiency was

not created by God, but created by man and I will be unpopular and say that the whole

world of MONEY was designed by Satan.

       The money system is not about achieving independence UNDER God, but

achieving independence AWAY from or APART from God.

       In High School, teens are taught that dependency upon God and parents is not

natural and that all children and teens should leave their fathers and mothers and work for

the banks so they don’t have to depend on God or their parents anymore and can, “Do it

on their own.” Achieving independent wealth and finances is considered the capitalist

dream, a dream many people have been denied due to circumstances beyond their own

control. Once such a system shuts you out – you are out! The only way back in once you

are out is to compromise and accept being PROGRAMMED for SUCCESS within this

SYSTEM that your soul is in continual rebellion against.

       Terrorists are murderers who deserve no recognition for murdering civilians,

women, babies, children and old people. Terrorists are just cruel murderers with no soul

or conscience. However, if we just took the Islamic religion away from them and learn

why they hate THE MONEY SYSTEM of capitalism so bad, it might seem more like an

act of war to destroy the devils and infidels of such a corrupt, terrible and unequal system
that is not only unbiblical, but evil to the core. Such an acknowledgment of how evil the

financial system would demand global protest from everyone with a common attitude:

WE WANT FREEDOM AWAY FROM TYRANNY! The financial system is tyrannical

and so, to a certain extent, communistic and socialist countries are somewhat right in

their propaganda that capitalism is an evil system.

       And yet, you might find all of your relatives embracing this evil system. Why?

Because the material rewards of “HARD WORK” lead to houses, cars, televisions,

entertainment centers, ball games, dance clubs, drinking, drug use, and all forms of carnal

indulgences that feel good, look good, and appeal to our natural selves. We want peace,

relaxation, and rest and so because we have no other system in place, we have become

dependent on the existing capitalist system to survive.

       The question is not about whether we can do it on our own, but whether we

should. If you develop a selfish system where everyone goes their own way and there is

no sharing, giving, caring, generosity, or unselfish love, people are going to suffer

because a lot of us can’t make it on our own due to failing health or lack of motivation or

just plain paralysis through lack of desire in submitting to a man-made system that

doesn’t work for those with free minds, free hearts, and free spirits.

       THE MONEY SYSTEM TERRORIZES people beginning in High School. In the

Jewish Bar Mitzvah a boy becomes a man at puberty and a woman becomes a woman at

puberty. This is NATURAL because if a sperm can fertilize an egg and make a woman

pregnant with a child, then naturally, men and women are capable of love, marriage, and

raising children from an early age. At puberty, modern children are terrorized by the

financial system because they are taught they cannot marry or have children until the
college years or afterwards. You have every person on earth, a teenager, with raging

hormones that are controlled by the financial system. Sure, you get some teen girls who

get pregnant and end up single mothers, but where did the fathers disappear to?

        A teenage boy is taught by the Masonic Christian right that he should wait until

marriage before having sex and girls are taught the same thing but with the edge that they

don’t need men or want men or desire men until they have independently gotten a

College degree ‘on their own’ and have ‘made their own money,’ thus spending a whole

lifetime not depending on a man or a marriage for financial support. Men are taught that

they are not truly men unless they have earned a college degree and are able to nest a

woman in a nice house with a comfortable life.

        What hope do teens have of getting married? None. The Money System

somehow manipulated population control by paying minimum wages to young teens who

have no chance or hope for providing for a wife and children. I wanted to be married at

13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33 – just that

many years. 33 – 13 = 20 years of being unmarried and unable to provide for a wife and


        When I was a teen and my father lost his job, he could no longer provide for his

family due to circumstances beyond his own control. Budget cuts, layoffs, affirmative

action, status quotas, women, gays, minorities, and the new world order all contributed to

my father’s misery and misfortune. Lack of access to good medical attention and lack of

a caring doctor to fulfill his health needs led to his drug habit as he could not afford to see

a doctor for his herniated disk as he had no medical insurance and could not afford

prescription drugs. So to curb his pain he took illegal drugs. As a result of consistent
unemployment, badgering from greedy, selfish relatives, the inability to provide for his

family, he had high blood pressure, anxiety, pain, suffering, depression, and a drug

problem which eventually led to his stroke.

       So I basically got out into the job market and decided to try to help out the best I

could within this system. Everywhere I looked as a teen was hopeless. Every business

paid teens the absolute minimum which the law demanded and when I was a teen the

minimum wage was $4.25 an hour. My whole job experiences are recorded in my

chapter entitled: THE AMERICAN NIGHTMARE, so I won’t go any further than that.

       I, like every other teen, was terrorized by the financial system. There was

nowhere I could go to earn decent money to pay my grandmother and parent’s rent into

my greedy uncle’s pocket. Although my uncle owned our apartment building, he still

took his own mother’s social security checks faithfully every month to pay for her rent

and my parent’s rent during my father’s time of misfortune and great defeat. My stupid

little minimum wage checks could barely pay for a few utilities and a little entertainment.

       From 13 to 33, my situation would remain helpless for 20 years. Of course, I was

fortunate enough to land a good paying job at 32 and provide for my parents at 32, but

before that, I never landed in the American System. Why not? Why didn’t I just apply

myself to the system like all my other relatives? Was there something wrong with me?

Did I lack motivation or determination? Why on earth, in view of everyone’s else’s

success would I lack the motivation and determination to SUCCEED?

       You can tell from my writings what my lifelong focus has been: THE END OF

THE WORLD. You have reviewed what I think and what’s been on my mind and so you

can better understand why I lacked the motive to engross myself in this stupid and
terrible system that has held everyone in slavery and hostage to ungodly principles that

are anti-Christ in nature.

       What principles am I discussing?

       We are programmed by the government during High School to get good grades so

we can go to apply for the College of our dreams. If we get accepted, we might graduate

and move on into the career of ‘our choice.’ But it can’t really be your choice unless you

have what’s called: A FAMILY CONTRIBUTION. You are drilled about your parent’s

employment and your financial history. If there is no FAMILY CONTRIBUTION your

chances of being accepted are slim to none. This basically filters out some poor families.

Sure, if you are good enough, they will be kind to accept you, grant you only $2,400 out

of a $25,000 a year debt, but even straight A students still have difficulties.

       It was bad enough that we could not marry, settle down and provide for children

during our teens, but now, during our young adult years we are taught promiscuity on the

left and celibacy on the right and we suffer biologically and spiritually because of a

MONEY SYSTEM that has manipulated us with principles that are the chief cause of all

our misery, depression, and anxiety.

       WE ARE ALL THREATENED by the money system from the time we graduate

High School into our College years. During College, you might volunteer or intern

during the time you are accepting LOAN MONEY FROM THE BANK AND THE

FEDERAL GOVERNMENT. So we party and live it up during our College years,

knowing that we have only 4 years to prove ourselves worthy of the system by

graduating. We are not TRULY INDEPENDENT during our College years, even though

that’s what the SYSTEM programs people to think. Actually, men and women are both

survival. The government is generous in housing students for 4 years and during that 4

years students are held PRISONERS to STUDENT LOAN DEBT, CAR LOAN DEBT,

and maybe even CREDIT CARD DEBT during these years of DEPENDING ON THE

GOVERNMENT instead of our parents.

       We had it so free and easy under the roof of our parents (assuming we had good

parents, but most people don’t have good parents and for lack of having good parents,

young people are deceived and fooled into thinking they can fill in what they lacked by

depending on the BANK rather than their parents for support).

       When the LOAN MONEY is gone upon graduating from College, we are forced

to get out of our dorms and our government sponsored apartments and get a career. You

are usually given 6 months to hit the pavement and plug into your chosen career path.

BUT WATCH OUT! If you didn’t intern, volunteer, or work part-time in your chosen

field, acquiring 3 to 5 years experience, most corporations won’t hire you with merely a

College degree! It’s as if you never went to College if you don’t have experience in your

related field. So the smart people get experience in their chosen field so that when they

graduate they can get that HIGH PAYING JOB that will pay off those HIGH STUDENT

LOAN DEBTS of $1,000 a month!

       So after College, you must purchase a house with a huge down payment. The

next threat you receive from the financial system is your CREDIT SCORE and if it’s not

high enough you won’t qualify for having a house and so you must rent an apartment

where someone else owns your roof and you are caught throwing away money into

someone else’s pocket, not investing into your own land and property. It is degrading to
now own your own land or property, so the ELITE SYSTEM might shut you out if you

have bad credit or bankruptcies or aren’t PERFECT in your financial history.

       You were depopulated as a teenager; you were depopulated as a young adult; and

now as an adult, you are held hostage to your own bad credit report! Okay, so let’s

assume that YOUR CREDIT REPORT had a high enough Credit Score for a down


OWNERSHIP! Not quite. Because now you have to pay for your $500,000 house, on

top of your $100,000 education. Don’t forget the car loans, the credit cards, the utilities,

the medical insurance, house insurances, car insurance, dental insurance, cable bill,

telephone bill, internet bill, cell phone bill, food expenses, high gas expenses, and all the

fun things that come with fixing up a house! I hope you get a good Lowe’s or Home

Depot Credit card! Just buy whatever you want – THE WORLD IS YOURS NOW


       Oops! On the job injury that leaves you disabled for the rest of your life and you

can’t work now! So now you must sell everything you have, hopefully pay everything

off or go bankrupt, and start over again in the same position you were in as a teenager.

       Decisions of love and marriage are mostly now made on this whole system. Sure,

a lot of people take chances and risks that they will survive and be SUCCESSFUL in this

system and THE SYSTEM DOES WORK when all is fine and dandy! But the system

becomes an illusion when you loose your job, can’t pay for everything and end up dead,

insane, broke, or thinking about committing a crime, all because of circumstances beyond

your own control.
       Wasn’t it so much better when angels depended on God and when we depended

on our parents? Whatever happened to FREEDOM?

       I have some bad news for you: THERE IS NO FREEDOM IN THE FINANCIAL


       We do know for a fact that many wealthy people break God’s Laws by lying,

cheating, stealing, and committing anti-Christ acts and that is how they become rich. Just

view the SEC litigation case files at ! Now you know the secrets of

American success in business.

       Wouldn’t it be nice to just forget about this whole system and live in a tent up in

the mountains some place and BE FREE like the Hippies tried during the 1960s? Don’t

worry! Our National Parks are owned by the United Nations and the State Police will

kick you out of God’s Land and God’s Property by claiming all land is owned by the

government and you have no rights to any land unless you are in THE SYSTEM working

and slaving and forfeiting your freedom and gospel principles to re-build the pyramids of

Egypt on every square inch of God’s green earth. You have no more rights to be hippies

and protest against the system by pitching a tent where you want to. The homeless are

not allowed to live off the land and must be cornered into the darkest, most disgusting

places in the city and most of them are condemned by society as drug abusers, insane

lunatics, losers, alcoholics and just plain lazy bumbs. Although it’s true in most cases

and they have a choice not to abuse their bodies and work for Jesus, the System is not

something they are motivated by anymore.

       What if Jesus were to tell us that being homeless is the path to Heaven and

Salvation during the last days? Would we be willing to give up the system, sell
everything, and surrender ourselves to a hard life outside the system? Churches won’t

teach you about that kind of surrender! There is no substance to modern spiritualized

concepts of giving up everything for Jesus. “If it costs me everything, I’ll obey!” But

first let me think about the cost of a college education; the cost of transportation; the cost

of housing; the cost of medical care; the cost of dental care; the cost of utilities; the cost

of marriage and children; the cost of burying the dead; let me think about all these costs

FIRST and then IF IT COSTS ME EVERYTHING, I’LL OBEY! Obey what? Churches

certainly aren’t teaching people to obey Jesus Christ, but to obey THE COSTS OF


Testament Law of tithing to my local church. It doesn’t cost me everything to pay 10%

to the Church, but you know something, my parents need that 10% this week, so I’ll tithe

to the god of the money system by caring for their needs, that I might glorify the God

who did not CREATE MONEY or the man-made financial institutions that have made us

all prisoners to the material world and our addictions therein.

        Whatever your concept of a green earth is, is a fading dream because the

vegetation is now withering and dying as man suffocates the land with concrete,

skyscrapers and pollution for the sake of corporate gain.

        As we might have addictions to pornography, drinking, smoking, drugs, sex,

music, television, cars, material possessions, etc., I say that the single worst addiction that

we as human beings suffer is our addiction to the MONEY SYSTEM.

        This is one of many reasons Christian Churches are losing the battle for people’s

souls is because they are teaching we can serve both God and Money, violating Jesus

Christ’s command in Matthew 6. No church wants to believe that they are using the
world’s MONEY SYSTEM to practice and prosper in their faith; no church wants to

believe that it’s wrong to tell young people that going into debt for an education is wrong

or that our whole financial system is WRONG on a Biblical level, because they have

become dependent upon the financial system for survival – so they can’t bite the hand

that feeds them. NONE OF US CAN BITE THE BANK THAT FEEDS US because this

has become THE SYSTEM.

          What did Jesus say about serving God and Money?

The Holy Bible, New International Version. Pradis CD-ROM:Mt 6:19.

Treasures in Heaven
6:22, 23 pp—Lk 11:34-36

Mt 6:19
        “Do not store up for yourselves treasures on earth, z where moth and rust
destroy, a and where thieves break in and steal.
Mt 6:20
        But store up for yourselves treasures in heaven, b where moth and rust do
not destroy, and where thieves do not break in and steal. c
Mt 6:21
        For where your treasure is, there your heart will be also. d
Mt 6:22
        “The eye is the lamp of the body. If your eyes are good, your whole body
will be full of light.
Mt 6:23
        But if your eyes are bad, your whole body will be full of darkness. If then the
light within you is darkness, how great is that darkness!
Mt 6:24
        “No one can serve two masters. Either he will hate the one and love the

other, or he will be devoted to the one and despise the other. You cannot serve

both God and Money. e

          We are mostly agreed that our treasures on earth are families, friends, spouses,

children, etc. We are willing to do anything and everything to take care of our own first

and these days, it’s difficult to be unselfish and think of other people’s needs, rather than

just our own.
          There is an old expression: “Give me liberty or give me death.” That’s why

people foreign and domestic prefer death to the American definition of ‘liberty’ because

under the banking system, there really is no liberty, north, south, east or west and we are

suffering miserably as a result. Freedom under this ungodly system is an illusion in

reality, a dream and an ideal that only death can cure. Heaven’s reality is walking in

God’s Holy Presence and if it’s one thing Satan proved in this world is that life without

God is truly hell! Separation from God is darkness and deep despair and a universe

without God’s Holiness is unholy and destined for destruction.


          The “democratic solution” throughout the 1990s from the Clinton/Gore

Administration was to pay everyone off. When you study the litigation cases that are

posted on you can instantly see the democratic policies which moved the

world towards a false peace process. They paid off terrorist states and terrorists

themselves. Janet Reno, herself, approved of funding to Hamas to track down where and

how they buy weapons that kill Israelis! From Janet Reno to Madeline Albright, the

democratic party used MONEY as their tool for PEACE. Such PEACE caused

International Security to be broken down and such a false peace cost the lives of several

Israeli soldiers and civilians.

          Jeremiah addresses the democratic party, “From the least to the greatest, all are

greedy for gain; prophets and priests alike, all practice deceit. They dress the wound of

my people as though it were not serious. ‘PEACE, PEACE,’ they say, when there is no

       When I worked for democratic corporations where Biblical Truth was hated and

Christians were despised, persecuted, & fired, there was no peace, no tolerance, no

consideration of others, no compassion or understanding, no love. What I met was a

bunch of God-haters and anti-Christs sitting in little positions of authority, abusing their

authority towards everyone and everything. Democrats talk a lot about Peace and

equality and freedom, but as soon as a Christian is under their ‘authority’ all of such talk

is gone and you won’t find kind, friendly people who are tolerant. Actually democrats

are tolerant of homosexual offenders, terrorists, child molesters, criminals, illegal

immigrants, pornographic kings and queens, gay parades, feminists and their lesbian sub-

ordinates, pagans, New Agers, Communists, Socialists, Fascists, Scientologists, Satanists,

and just about every anti-Biblical principle there is.

       If it’s one thing I experienced in the American Nightmare of working with

‘people of diverse cultures, religions, & politics’ was a complete disaster when working

with democrats who run America’s corporations. Democrats have no value system and

hate Christians and Christianity. Although there is tolerance of apostate Jews who have

abandoned faith in the God of Israel, there is no real tolerance of religious Jews or

Orthodox Jews who love the Torah and the Prophets. There is no tolerance of Christians

who love the Bible or enjoy talking about Jesus in the work place.

       For example, I worked with a temporary employment agency who stated a

company needed someone to help out for a few months and during my first week, as soon

as someone found out I was a Christian, the company asked the employment agency that

they didn’t need me after all. You see, democratic institutions talk a good talk about

peace and equality, until they are granted positions of authority and power over your job
and then you will see the horns come out and evil being spoken of behind your back after

the happy faces disappear.

       Although there are laws against discrimination, races still discriminate against

each other with hateful vendettas. You will find lesbian bosses hating heterosexual men

and forming cliques, while doing the best they can to humiliate men working under them.

It’s a fact that DIVERSITY doesn’t work because there is no unity between hearts and

souls. There is no agreement between God’s Temple and the temples of idols. I can

guarantee you that you can be the most joyful, tolerant, peaceful Christian in the world

and still not get along with pagans, witches, Satanists, new agers, Scientologists, and a

certain remnant of unbelieving God-haters who are working in America’s corporations

lying, cheating, stealing and committing fraud, all the time pushing the honest, God-

fearing people who won’t participate in anti-Christ principles that promote anti-Christ

business policies. The 1990s were an accurate reflection of an anti-Christ government

and what an anti-Christ business economy looks like and as surely the Securities

Exchange Commission revealed the true nature of how America’s executives did

business during the Clinton/Gore administration, so will the Second Coming of Jesus

Christ bring judgment to the biggest fraud of all history – the anti-Christ and his

advocates. The anti-Christ will be the greatest liar and fraud ever to arise and if you

thought Islam was a bad religion, wait until this man has been given full power over the

world’s economy!

       I applauded Fox News and the Bush Administration from 2001 through 2008 for

taking a stand against all these evil doers.
       When we survey Israel’s war against Hezbollah terrorists in Lebanon during July

2006, the world’s reaction was astonishing! Virtually no one came to the aid of Israel,

except the Bush administration in the United States, who just simply gave approval to

Israel to bomb the crap out of Lebanon until every Hezbollah terrorist threat was

removed. What was the world’s response? Let’s send some United Nation observers to

Lebanon to find out if there is a democratic solution between Israel and Hezbollah

terrorists so that Israel can stop bombing Lebanon! The world was more concerned with

Israel’s self-defense postures than they were concerned about the hundreds of rockets

being fired at Israel’s population. The world’s solution was to send a United Nations

military force to create a buffer zone between Israel and Lebanon, a slow moving

decision-making process.

       From Peace to war, the United Nations was dysfunctional in establishing a

solution for Israel and Palestine and the only real reason that Islamic Palestinians were

supported and defended for PEACE was because of oil & petroleum interests among the

OPEC countries. Israel was sold out so that business could continue. But what the stupid

United Nations is ignoring is the Biblical prophecy concerning God’s answer to the world

allowing Israel to be attacked: TOTAL DESTRUCTION!

       The United Nations blasted Israel for accidentally killing 4 U.N. observers after

their alleged, “Repeated warnings,” not to bomb a certain area where U.N. officials were

staying. Well, the U.N. had no business setting foot there so I applauded Israel!

       Israel is the last statement that God is going to make on earth about who and

where the True source of Peace and security comes from: It comes from Jesus, the

Messiah of both Israel and the entire world.
       While the primitive and barbaric United Nations assembles together against Israel

and against Christians throughout the world, remember who the owner of planet earth is

and that because the world is planning the eviction and extermination of Israel, God has

his plans for global eviction, which are in effect RIGHT NOW, TODAY!

       Earthquakes, fires, floods, hurricanes, volcanic explosions, global warming,

famines, pestilences, diseases, deaths, are all on the increase, but HAVE HOPE – Israel’s

Savior is coming soon on the clouds of Heaven! This world will be plundered and

destroyed, so it’s time to get ready and join the Kingdom that will never be destroyed –

the Kingdom where Jesus sits as King of kings and Lord of lords. Are you ready to stand

with Jesus?

       I will take some quotes from Ronald Sider’s book entitled: RICH CHRISTIANS

IN AN AGE OF HUNGER: Moving From Affluence To Generosity. Although I

would disagree with his support and defense of THE GLOBAL ECONOMY there are

some good facts from the book to be considered:

[PAGE 1] – “Can overfed, comfortably clothed, and luxuriously housed persons

understand poverty? Can we truly feel what it is like to be a nine-year old boy playing

outside a village school he cannot attend because his father is UNABLE TO AFFORD

THE BOOKS? Can we comprehend what it means for poverty-stricken parents to watch

with helpless grief as their baby daughter dies of a common childhood disease because


awful truth that 30,000 children die every day of hunger and preventable diseases?”

[PAGE 2-3] – “The World Bank estimates that 1.2 billion people live in that kind of

grinding poverty—trying to survive on one dollar or less a day. In addition to these 1.2

billion who live in almost absolute poverty, another 1.6 billion are very poor, living on

two dollars or less a day. That means just a little less than half of the world’s people (2.8

billion) try to survive on two dollars a day or less. Hunger and starvation stalk our world.

Famine and disease are alive and well on planet Earth. 30,000 children die every day of

hunger and preventable diseases. 13 million people die every year from infectious and

parasitic diseases WE KNOW HOW TO PREVENT…In 1970, 918 million people, or 35

percent of the developing world, were chronically undernourished. By 1991, that figure

had fallen to 841 million people, or 20 percent of the people in developing countries. By
2002, even though the world’s total population continued to grow, the number of those

undernourished was still about the same (840 million people), but that figure represented

only 17 percent of people in the developing world…The number of hungry people in

Latin America and the Caribbean rose from 45.9 million in 1980 to 58.8 million in 1991

and then dropped slightly to 53.4 million by 2001. In Sub-Saharan Africa, both the

number and percentage of hungry people have increased. In 1970, the figure was 103

million (38 percent of the region’s population). By 1980, the number had grown to 125.4

million. By 2001, it was 198.4 million. In South Asia, the country of India alone has

more than 214 million hungry people, and the increase of hunger in recent years has been

steepest there, with 19 million more people becoming hungry between 1997 and

2001…More than a billion desperate neighbors live in wrenching poverty—and another 2

billion are poor.”

[PAGE 4] – “The World Bank divides countries into 4 categories:

   1.      LOW INCOME = $735 or less

   2.      LOWER MIDDLE INCOME = $736 - $2,935

   3.      UPPER MIDDLE INCOME = $2,936 - $9,075

   4.      HIGH INCOME = $9,076 or more

   According to the World Bank, “Economies are divided according to 2002 GNI (Gross

National Income] per capita, calculated using World Bank Atlas method…Low-income

countries (2.5 billion people):











   BOLIVIA ($890)

   NAMBIA ($1,870)

   UKRAINE ($970.00)

   RUSSIA ($2,610)

   PHILIPPINES ($1,080 in 2003)

   CHINA ($1,100 in 2003)

   THAILAND ($2,190 in 2003)

      Lower-middle income countries (2.4 billion people) - The annual per capita

GROSS NATIONAL INCOME in these countries ranges from $736.00 to $2,935.

      Upper-middle-income countries (329 million people).

   VENEZUELA ($4,090)

   BARBADOS ($9,270)

      High-Income countries (966 million people).

   NEW ZEALAND ($15,870)

   SWITZERLAND ($39,880)
   UNITED STATES ($37,610)

   UNITED KINGDOM ($28,350)

   JAPAN ($34,510)

[PAGES 6 – 7] – “Who PROFITED? Even Brazil’s own MINISTER of finance admitted

in 1972 that only 5 percent of the people had benefited from the fantastic growth of the

Brazilian economy. In 1989, two-thirds of Brazilian families tried to survive on less than

$500.00 a month. In 1980, 40 percent of the total population of Brazil suffered from

malnutrition…Today, 54 million Brazilians live below the poverty level. And 15.6

percent of the people are undernourished. The poorest one-fifth of Brazil’s 173 million

people receive only 2 percent of the national income; 9.9 percent live on less than one

dollar per day. In 1989, the richest 10 percent of the population received 51.3 percent of

the country’s income, while the poorest 60 percent received 15.9 percent. Tragically,

Brazil’s rapid economic growth has done far too little to help the people who need it the

most. World poverty is a hundred million mothers weeping because they cannot feed

their children…Death usually results from diseases that underfed bodies cannot resist…In

2000, UNICEF reported that 149 million children in developing countries were


[PAGE 11] – “The World Bank reports that 1 billion do not have access to safe water,

and 2.5 billion do not have access to improved sanitation. The World Health

Organization estimates that each day, 6,000 children in developing countries die of lack

of clean water and sanitation…Lacking both food and medicine, poor nations have much

higher infant mortality rates than the developed world. The cost of cleaner water and

better sanitation is relatively small. In 1996, the World Health Organization reported that
an annual increase in preventative care of 75 cents per person in the Third World could

save 5 million lives every year. That would take less than $3 billion. Surely the people

of the wealthiest nations can find $3 billion to save 5 million people. The National

Center for Health Statistics reported that people in the United States spend between $30

and $50 billion each year on diets and related expenditures to reduce their calorie intake.”

       All belong to low-income countries.
LOXLEY’S SOLUTION: As we learned in the aftermath of Hurricane Katrina, when the

whole world pulls together, some results can be achieved. By donating to the Red Cross,

Salvation Army, Feed The Children, or Christian Children’s Fund, we can help. Instead

of going to the movies, we can sacrifice some of our free time to save a life. Even if you

can only donate $10.00, that ten dollars will save a life. Do you know what these poor,

UNDERDEVELOPED countries will end up doing? Joining the United Nations and

receiving money from THE WORLD BANK, placing the communities into debt for

human salvation. Yes, no matter what the financial costs are involved, saving life is

better than just standing by and watching people suffer and die. The common expression

among the 2.8 billion people who live on two dollars or less a day is: WHAT’S THE


       When you examine WHAT PEOPLE EARN, not even those people CAN

AFFORD decent medical care or have good medical insurance. Medical insurances run

anywhere from $150.00 to $400.00 a month. Who can AFFORD that? The prices of

school books, in addition to College tuitions, room & board, & other expenses are TOO

HIGH! Inflation has gotten out of hand in America and in Europe and all over the world.

       THE BANKERS IN CHARGE OF THE WORLD’S MONEY are causing all the

misery and distress of our times. Why should we blame God, when it is the alleged gods

of the global economy who are in charge of our price gouging and price fixing? Why

should Democrats blame the God of the Holy Bible and Republicans for their problems?


take this communistic capitalism and impose their communistic dictatorship on the whole

world? Apparently so. They think that they can do everything without Jesus and so the
human race will suffer as a result of their mockery and hatred of Jesus, leaving His Name

out of politics and business.

       Since Jesus OWNS PLANET EARTH and created everything, should we be

surprised when He chooses not to intervene in human affairs? If the Romans beat Jesus

up and crucified Him on the Cross at JEWISH SANHEDRIN approval, then why should

Jesus respond to the Democratic Romans and Jews who crucify him from the thrones of

government AUTHORITY every day? The result of PRIDE goes before our fall and it is

human pride in a human system that has caused misery and failure. I can’t tell you how

many times I’ve been personally humiliated, exasperated, and embarrassed whenever my

mother said she couldn’t afford something or she couldn’t get affordable health care.

       What we will see in the future is a shift in global economic policy. In the last

days of life on earth, you will have all of your needs provided for if you will do just one


mark of the global economic beast you will be able to buy and sell – business as usual.

However, if you don’t accept the mark today, you will not be able to buy or sell, you will

not be successful, you will be rejected and scoffed at by friends, family, neighbors, and

your local church. If you should choose today to reject the financial system and vow to

live in poverty to your own death, disease, and demise, then you can only keep your soul,

something the financial institutions will not be able to take away from you. For rejecting

modern capitalism you can expect to loose everything you materially own and to walk

among the poor, the needy, & the forgotten whom the world has rejected as the social

lepers of the world.
       However, it is not the poor, the homeless, and the hungry who are socially

diseased when it comes to Biblical truth: It is the wise men, the scholars, the educated,

and the leaders who are considered foolish by God and we should not expect to receive

any recognition on earth when we follow the Real Jesus who does not demand us to

gather together for CORPORATE WORSHIP.


       IT IS THE GREED OF THE CORPORATE ELITE who put a price and a label of

ownership on God’s Creation. In the Book of Acts we learned about how to become

FREE, but the world doesn’t want FREEDOM. The world wants to continue to barter

their souls in exchange for material comforts and luxuries. You might hear from the

Church pulpits that support for American Capitalism is justified by our human needs,

wants, & concerns.

       I, Loxley, am working for one of the Anti-Christ’s corporations right now. No

matter what company I work for, the work force is locked into the global beast. For now,

I must take care of disabled adults who depend on me for my meager income. When my

work is done, the Lord will decide if I choose to stay within this stupid system, married to

a beautiful woman, or if I will soon cast aside all attachments to this material world to

serve Jesus among the poor as a poor man. These are my two options and as I work

today under the PYRAMIDS OF EGYPTIAN SLAVERY, I understand that people have

a basic need, want, and desire to take care of themselves and their families and there is

nothing un-Biblical about working in order to survive.

       I am not against working. But those who can’t work ought to have all their needs

provided for and those who can work and want to work ought to provide and care for
them. If, however, the System demands your worship, you must abandon the whole thing

and go back to the Book of Acts to learn about how you can be freed from slavery to

serving Roman oppression.

[PAGE 17] – Not until 1830 did the world have one billion people. It took only one

hundred years more to add another billion. Within a mere thirty years another billion

human beings appeared. The fourth billion arrived in only 15 years, by 1975. In 2004,

the world had 6.4 billion human inhabitants. This number could rise to more than 10.7

billion in the next 50 years.

[PAGE 20] – Worldwide, an estimated 5 million to 7 million hectares (1 hectare = 2.47

acres) of farming land disappear each year. UNICEF reports that every year 42 million

acres (a combined area the size of Oklahoma) of tropical forests are destroyed and about

15 million acres (the size of West Virginia) of dry lands turn into deserts. The United

Nations reports that desertification is a worldwide problem directly affecting 250 million

people and a third of the earth’s land surface or more than 4 billion hectares. Worldwide,

some 70 percent of the 5.2 billion hectares of drylands used for agriculture is already

degraded and threatened by desertification.”

[PAGES 23 - 24] – Costly, manipulative advertising bombards us at every turn, and its

primary purpose is not to inform; it is to create desire. Luxurious houses in BETTER

HOMES AND GARDENS make our perfectly adequate houses shrink by comparison

into dilapidated, tiny cottages in need of immediate renovation…We in the U.S. spend

more money on advertising than on all our public institutions of higher education. In

1996, we spent $174 billion, and in 2002 that figure soared to $237 billion. In 2000,

worldwide expenditures for advertising were $463.9 billion. Tragically, a lot of
advertising is used ‘to convince us that Jesus was wrong about the abundance of

possessions. One of the most astounding things about the affluent [having a generously

sufficient and typically increasing supply of material possessions] minority is that we

honestly think we have barely enough to survive in modest comfort. Constant, seductive

advertising helps to create this destructive delusion. Advertisers regularly deceive us into

thinking that we genuinely need one luxury after another. We are convinced that we are

in competition with our neighbors. So we buy another dress, sports jacket, or sports car,

and thereby force up the standard of living. The increasingly affluent standard of living

is the god of twenty-first century North America, and the adman is its

prophet…Advertisers know that we all long for the qualities of life that will satisfy our

deepest needs; we long for significance, love and joy. Marketing recognizes these needs

and hooks into them. But then, in order to sell us more gadgets, it promotes the big lie. It

says that love and fulfillment come from more and more material abundance.”

[PAGE 32] – “NEWSWEEK did a story titled “THE MIDDLE CLASS POOR,” calmly

reporting that U.S. citizens earning $38,200, $46,300, or even $63,700 a year felt that

they were at the edge of poverty. One resident of New York City grumbled that ‘you just

can’t live in this city on a hundred thousand dollars a year.’ In the fall of 1995, a U.S.

Congressman announced that his salary of $163,000 per year put him in the lower middle

class. To the vast majority of the world’s people, such statements would be

unintelligible—or dishonest. To be sure, we do need $50,000, $70,000, or even more

each year if we insist on having two cars, an expensively furnished, sprawling suburban

home, a million dollar life insurance policy, new clothes every time fashions change, the

most recent ‘laborsaving devices’ for home and garden, an annual three-week vacation,
and so on. Many North Americans have come to expect precisely that. But that is hardly

life at the edge of poverty.”

[PAGE 34] – “Between 1987 and 1994, global military spending declined at an estimated

annual rate of 3.6 percent. That yielded a cumulative peace dividend of $935 billion--

$810 billion in industrialized countries and $125 billion in developing countries.

Tragically, we were not willing to spend the peace dividend on increasing foreign aid for

the poor. And in more recent years, especially September 11, 2001, military

expenditures, especially in the United States, have rapidly increased.”

[PAGE 35] – BREAD FOR THE WORLD reports that ‘EDUCATION, especially of

girls, is strongly correlated with lower birthrates…In Bangladesh, a midday meal

program designed to increase the enrollment of girls in school resulted in a 25 percent

decline in birth rates over 6 years.’ EDUCATION DELAYS THE TIME WHEN


[PAGE 36] – Some evangelical Christians argue that they must live in affluence to


CALIFORNIA has a lavish, multimillion-dollar plant complete with a series of water

fountains that begin spraying when the minister touches a button in the pulpit. The

Pastor, Robert Schuller, defended his luxurious facilities:

       “We are trying to make a big, beautiful impression upon the affluent non-

religious American who is riding by on this busy freeway. It’s obvious that we are not

trying to impress the Christians! Nor are we trying to impress the social workers in the

County Welfare Department. They would tell us that we ought to be content to remain

in the Orange Drive-In Theater and give the money to feed the poor. But suppose we
had given this money to fee the poor? What would we have today? We would still have

hungry, poor people and God would not have this tremendous base of operations which

He is using to inspire people to become more successful, more affluent, more generous,

more genuinely unselfish in their giving of themselves.”

       “How many more glass cathedrals would we build if we first examined the needs

of the billion-plus people who live on one dollar a day?” [END OF RICH CHRISTIANS


       There were many things about Ronald Sider’s book that I enjoyed reading about.

Although I would disagree with his somewhat boring and clinical approach to the Bible,

he had some good highlights. Although he attempts to reach out to people with a

message of Biblical Salvation, he seems to justify our integration into the economic

system. Unfortunately, Sider’s world vision for solving global poverty will have to be

rejected because Christians in the last days will have to reject the whole world to gain

their souls. This means that we will not be able to depend on the financial system for

help or guidance or salvation. If you can’t buy or sell without accepting the mark of the

name of the beast, then you must not join that system. I do agree that focusing on what

the Bible says, in being generous, giving, and willing to share is crucial to global


       The reason I am alive today, is because somebody chose to show God’s Love by

sacrificing time, energy, & money to help me get a tiny house. Someone loved me

enough to give up something so I could have a second chance at life within this system.

In truth, I drowned in New York City. With layoffs, budget cuts, the elevation of women

to supervisory roles, the elevation of African Americans to supervisory positions over
white males, the elevation of the unskilled immigrant versus the skilled American citizen,

the elevation of gays and lesbians, offering partnership benefits to these wicked perverts:

There was no chance for success. Circumstances beyond my own control had contributed

to my failure in New York City high-rises.

       I was astonished over my lack of patriotism after the September 11, 2001 terrorist

attacks because American Government had been hijacked by Masons a long time ago and

I found myself seeking justice not just against Islamic fundamentalists, but justice against

Masons. Masons have destroyed everything they attempted to build by worshipping

every other god except the God of Israel through Jesus’ Name. They rejected Jesus, the

Name above all names in their planning and building, their buying and their selling.

They rejected Jesus in government, in education, and in business.

       Ronald Sider goes on to write in his book:


[PAGES 86 – 87] – “God wants the rest of us to provide a generous share of the

necessities of life to those who cannot work…It is a sinful abomination for one part of the

world’s Christians to grow richer year by year while our brothers and sisters ache and

suffer for lack of minimal health care, minimal education, and even—in some cases—

enough food to escape starvation…Christians in the United States spent $15.7 billion on

new Church construction alone in the six years between 1984 and 1989. Would we go on

building lavishly furnished expensive church buildings if members of our own

congregations were starving? The division between the haves and the have nots in the

body of Christ is a major hindrance to world evangelism. Hungry people in the Third

World have difficulty accepting a Christ preached by people who symbolize (and often
defend the materialism of) the richest societies on earth….BECAUSE OF ITS




[PAGES 104 – 105] – “In many churches today, ‘SUCCESS’ in business is one of the

chief criteria for selection to the church board. Is that not a blatant reversal of Biblical

teaching on the importance of possessions? In a consumer society that increasingly

measures a person’s worth and importance by the amount of his or her material

possessions, Biblical Christians will reject materialism without falling into asceticism.”

[PAGES 119 – 121] – “Conservatives blame the poor for their misery. Liberals reject

that view as hard-hearted and wrong-headed. Rather than blaming the victims, liberals

argue, we should condemn the structures that create poverty. Conservatives scoff at such

bleeding-heart liberals who cannot see or will not admit how sinful choices about sex,

drugs, alcohol, and work contribute significantly to poverty. Who is right? Who is

wrong? Both. There is no single cause of poverty.” [END OF QUOTES]

SUNSTAR CONTINUED: Ever notice how everyone seems to have some kind of

PROGRAM to CURE POVERTY? Oftentimes, naïve Christians blame insanity, drugs,

alcoholism, or a sinful mind as the reason why some of the homeless don’t want to work.

I have heard Christians argue: ‘I would never ever give money to a homeless person

because they would just waste it on sinful indulgences such as alcohol or drugs.’ Or you

might hear some ‘Christians’ say, “That person became poor because they had sinful

addictions.” Yet, you might find Christians like SUNSTAR out at a dance club one

night, having a few drinks, laughing, dancing, and partying his butt off. In fact, most of
the rich, wealthy, and middle class all drink and do drugs and didn’t God give them the

opportunity to earn the money to take care of themselves? Like Ronald Sider, I agree

that it is not because a person has sinned that a person ends up poor. There are a variety

of economic factors and evil social structures which create poverty. These varieties of

circumstances can go beyond the control of an individual who ends up destitute. We

cannot blame one thing as the leading causes of poverty or insanity. We should not

condemn all homeless and destitute people as a bunch of drunk, lazy bumbs who don’t

want to work and just want to pleasure themselves with immoral habits. If God Almighty

thought this way, He wouldn’t have shared His planet with any of us, because look at

what the human race has done to deface and destroy HIS Creation? Look at how we

wasted the wealth God gave us on drunkenness and stupidity! We have no room to talk.

Not giving to the poor, the needy, and the homeless, has no justifiable excuse. Never

cover up your greed and wear PRIDE as a mask to hide your reason for clenching your

wallets and refusing to give to someone who is in need of your graceful giving.

       If you don’t want to give a homeless person money, then give them food and

drink for the week. Get them some clothes and feed them for CHRIST’S SAKE! Don’t

just pass by someone when you have the opportunity to help RIGHT THEN AND

THERE and don’t be afraid to spend five extra minutes to go back into the grocery store

and buy a destitute person some drinks and food. I have done it on several occasions

because Jesus loves me and I love Jesus and moreso, Jesus loves the poor and the needy

and wants me to give. I remember I had only five dollars left on the day before pay day

and I saw a man who had nothing and was sitting in the dirt. I stopped and just gave him

the money. Why? God trusted me with the freedom to have my own money, so I will
trust this lonely bumb to buy whatever he wants. I have bought beer, whine, and whiskey

for the homeless, not to encourage drunkenness, but to bring a person pleasure. Drinking

brings pleasure to the carnal senses and makes a person laugh and feel silly, so I figured

that since the person was not insane and not a drunk, I could let them have a little

pleasure in life. Why? Because I am on my way into a dance club to also enjoy a few

drinks and some good music. Just because I work and can enjoy drinking doesn’t mean

that a person who chooses not to work can’t enjoy the same pleasures I am experiencing.

Many Christians circles would tell me how wrong I am for giving money and alcohol to a

homeless person. But I no longer consider what elite circles have to say. Whether it’s

food, water, clothing, wine, beer, or money, I will give what I have to help someone in

need and make them feel better. Sometimes I will even hand a person a Bible. When I

was at the gas station this week I saw a drunk man with a paper sack of beer in his hand,

stumbling around, cursing to himself. Instead of being afraid of him or angry, I handed

him a Bible. I walked right up to him, put the Bible in his hands and said, “This is a Gift

for you. Keep it and enjoy it.” I walked away. He was rather overjoyed to receive a nice

shiny gold painted Bible and I prayed to the Lord that He would read that Bible and find

more pleasure in the Bible than in his beer. Of course, giving someone who already has a

drink in their hands, more alcohol is the wrong selection for the moment. I was only

referring to the sober poor person, who has nothing in his hand to drink and is clear

thinking during the day. One homeless man asked me, “Can you buy me a beer?” Since

I was buying some whiskey for myself, I replied, “Sure.”

       Am I drinking whiskey and coke to get drunk? No. I buy whiskey and coke

because it’s pleasurable and it tastes good. I don’t drink to get drunk. I moderately drink
because I enjoy the taste of alcohol SOMETIMES. I reason that if the rich and famous,

or the middle class get to enjoy liquor, why should I deprive a fellow human being who

can’t afford alcohol the same freedom of enjoyment?

       Just last week, about a few weeks after Hurricane Katrina hit New Orleans and

African Americans dispersed all over America, I saw a black girl with a bottle of Brandy

in one hand and a bottle of wine in the other hand. She tried walking out the door, but the

side door of the grocery store was locked. She walked right past me. Should I grab her

and take her down for an attempted theft or let her go? Well, her boyfriend, BIG

BUBBA, was around the corner and when she walked out another door, right in front of

the cashiers, Bubba was waiting outside in his car. She got inside the car and took off

with a free bottle of Brandy and wine. Stealing is wrong. Now I could see if the black

girl was hungry and she wanted to take some fruit, vegetables or a drink for her survival,

then I wouldn’t consider taking food without asking stealing. But this girl stole alcohol!

       These people had a car, could afford gas, and probably had jobs. Maybe not.

Poverty is no excuse for stealing and one of the Ten Commandments is: THOU SHALT

NOT STEAL! Taking something that does not belong to you is stealing. So there is a lot

of ridiculous theft through looting, which is a crime. Taking food because you are

hungry and need to live is also wrong, but, if you were to ask a grocery store to donate

some food, they would not give away food for free.

       The food belongs to the people because God gave all of us food and water.

Mankind has sinned & violated God’s Will by putting self-owned labels on food,

produce, water, & dairy products. By believing that man OWNS the food and replacing

God’s Will with self-will is wrong. Is is wrong for hungry people and thirsty people to
walk into a grocery store when starving and thirsting, take a little bit of food and water

for sustenance without paying for it? In my personal opinion – NO.

        Robin Hood would be considered a bad hero by conservative Christians.

However, he took back from the rich what the rich stole from the poor through unfair

taxation, unfair garnishment of wages, and garnishment of land, cattle, & produce,

virtually leaving the people destitute and worshiping the evil emperor King George. My

favorite Robin Hood hero was Earl Flynn. Remember that Judas Maccabees fought

against Antiochus IV Epiphanes and won back God’s Land for the Jewish people.

        If the rich have stolen from God and stolen from the people what belongs to God

and to the people, then the people have the right to have what God created for them for

their survival.

        Let’s take the so-called “LOOTING CRISIS” during Hurricane Katrina because

the people who were hungry and thirsty were herded together with those who were petty

thieves or grand larcenists. We must distinguish between those who need to take water

and food for personal survival from those who STEAL for personal, ill-gotten gain, for

one of the most important of God’s Commandments is: THOU SHALT NOT STEAL.

        After Hurricane Katrina, when the stupid legalistic Democratic party and

Republican party, who had meals, drinks, & were able to go back to their nice mansions



legalistic Christianity or legalistic secularism WITHOUT GRACE, MERCY,

COMPASSION, UNDERSTANDING is not Christianity – but it’s a spirit of

communism and fascism. I think that Democrats are like Communists and that
sometimes, Republicans can be legalistic fascists. When you have fascists and

communists working together to oppress and embarrass the poor, it’s definitely not a

good thing.

       After Hurricane Katrina, I had to consider a particular issue of whether or not it

was a sin or a crime for the people, who had a Force 5 Hurricane blow away the entire

city of New Orleans, to take food and water from ravaged grocery stores for their

survival. I reasoned, “NO WAY! LET THEM HAVE THE FOOD AND WATER.”

Now, yes, looters who abuse survival by taking electronics, alcohol, and other material

possessions that God did not create for our survival IS STEALING and wrong. Anyone

who plunders for the sake of personal gain without the element of survival is stealing and

therefore a criminal. You should not steal alcohol or other man-made inventions because

God did not create those products for your survival. If, however, you need food,

medicine or a First Aid kit then you must go for it when the need arises and forget about

all human laws and ideals that would hinder your survival. You should never ever

commit an act of violence over material goods and should submit to law enforcement

when a gun is pointed at your head.

       In the case of Hurricane Katrina, the food would spoil and go bad anyways by the

time our government sponsored programs would kick in for clean up, so it would be okay

for the people to use up that food and drink as it will expire in a few days anyways, if

there is any gleanings left over to be had.

       However, if there is a local rescue mission available, then it would be a great idea

to use their resources for food and drink, shelter & other material needs. Or, if their

house has been exhausted, find out where donations and charitable places are where you
can avoid having to take food and drink that is priced in grocery stores and unavailable to

you, as the world’s law considers taking food and drink without paying for it stealing.

       I’m all for the Robin Hood mentality, but I am also considerate of what God’s

Law says against stealing from Him for personal gain or satisfaction. In the case of a

natural disaster, take what you need for survival, but take nothing else, as Paul stated to

be content with food and clothing and nothing more.

       After Hurricane Katrina, those evil democrats wanted to blame the President

alone for the lack of quick response time in helping the disaster victims, however, WE

ARE ALL RESPONSIBLE FOR A SLOW RESPONSE in providing aid to the disaster

victims and the fact that there was no plan to help American citizens is the responsibility

of ALL PARTIES throughout America. Democrats forgot about the fact that one of the

first acts President Bush signed into law was granting four billion dollars to FAITH-

BASED organizations that provide for the needs and concerns of the local communities,

including housing, food, and medical needs.

       $ 4 billion = $4,000,000,000. I personally benefited from this $4 billion dollars

and without that aid, men like me would have been homeless. It is during times of

disaster that we suddenly find Churches opening up their doors to house displaced

victims of a disaster. Charitable giving among Churches and Rescue Missions reminds

all of us what Jesus Christ meant about giving up material things to help provide for the

needs and concerns of others. Instead of looting, I would encourage people to seek out

places that provide food, clothing, medicine and shelter – such as THE SALVATION

ARMY or THE RED CROSS, or a local Church.
        It is okay to depend on charitable organizations and institutions which FREELY

provide for your needs without cost or obligation. Jesus Christ has allowed on you to

depend on others for survival – it’s all a Gift for you during your time of grief, ruin, and

misery. At the same time you are taking material goods for your survival, you can also

make a difference by volunteering to help others who are in the same sinking ship you are

in and provide a life raft to others.

        Sharing, giving, caring, and helping out are all a part of God’s Plan and we are to

use HIS LAND, HIS RESOURCES, HIS EARTH to benefit and serve the over 2.5

billion people who live on $2.00 or less a day. Salvation doesn’t mean just waiting for

Jesus to return on the clouds of the sky, although there will come a moment for future

believers to drop everything, look up and await their coming Messiah, but Salvation

means doing the work of Jesus until Jesus returns. The work of God is not only to

believe in Jesus but also to put that faith into action when an opportunity arises to do so.

You don’t always have to give material possessions or money – you can exclusively

donate your time and words of encouragement to bring smiles, joy, laughter, and hope for

people who have nothing but sadness, hopelessness, anxiety, and discouragement.

        Although modern Churches have been institutionalized for the beast’s system,

sometimes we may have to depend upon other people for help and survival, so long as no

mark is forced into your forehead, your right hand, or your identity. If anyone forces you

into A PROGRAM that is accepting of a worldly mark, then it will be better for you not

to accept help and just accept the death of yourself with a prayer for Jesus to come save

and rescue you from a world that is no longer concerned about His Will.
       Ronald Sider, in his book: RICH CHRISTIANS IN AN AGE OF HUNGER


[PAGES 147 – 149] – “From 1997 to 2000 the external debt (money borrowed from

outside the country) owed by developing countries increased by 3,000 percent! Many

poor nations, especially in Africa, CANNOT REPAY THESE INTERNATIONAL


million Tanzanians lacked access to safe water, the government spent $155 million in

1993 – 1994 on debt repayments. This was more than the combined budget for clean

water and health. Poor nations’ debt payments have also deprived children of basic

education….The Zambian government spent $37 million on primary school education

from 1990 to 1993, but its scheduled debt repayments for the same period were $1.3

billion, thirty-five times that amount…The countries of Africa spend FOUR TIMES as

much money every year on payments on their foreign debt as they spend on health care

and education combined. The result is illiteracy, starvation, and death. From 1980 to

1998, the life expectancy in many countries in Sub-Saharan Africa fell dramatically.

According to the World Bank, the average person in the most heavily indebted countries

(which include most of the countries in Sub-Saharan Africa) lives thirteen years less than

persons in other developing nations…The United Nations has estimated that 19,000

children die every day AS A RESULT OF THE DEBT CRISIS…The World Bank and

International Monetary Fund have identified 42 countries as “Heavily Indebted Poor

Countries.” Most of them, 34, are in Africa. In 2004, these 34 African countries had a

combined foreign debt of $106 billion. World renowned American economist Professor
Jeffrey Sachs suggested in July 2004 that perhaps these countries should simply refuse to


SUNSTAR: Should we blame God or man? God already created the food and produce

and it’s mankind who is hindering other people from receiving aid or help because of an

OPPRESSIVE FINANCIAL SYSTEM that rewards an elite few and punishes the masses

by exclusion from all the benefits which the rich and the powerful get to enjoy. 19,000

children die every day AS A RESULT OF THE DEBT CRISIS. Should we not fix the

international and national debt crisis? Of course we should. The current leaders need to

be dethroned in all governments and we need a NEW SYSTEM and a NEW PLAN to

benefit EVERYONE EQUALLY in every nation.


It is my conviction that statistics might be inaccurate, as there
may be even more homeless than what they are letting us know.
There are also millions of Americans living at poverty wages,
thanks to the pyramids of slavery where the elite few earn
enough to pay for everything, whereas the low wage workers do
not. SALARY is not CONSUMERATE with the costs of housing,
health care, education, etc.

Why should the homeless care about being PROGRAMMED to come
back into a SYSTEM they don’t believe in? Why should we be carded
or asked to become another number? THE FREE do not want your
PROGRAMS for a ‘better life,’ if that is what you call it! Unless it’s
FREE, we don’t want to be programmed by YOU! Just shut up and
feed us! We just need food, clothes, and shelter – so if you can’t just
give us those basic things – we are not interested in being

      National Homeless Estimates: 700,000 per night; 2 million/year.
       (National Law Center on Homelessness and Poverty, 1999).
      Thirty-one million Americans now live in hunger or on the edge
       of hunger. (State Government Responses to the Food Assistance
       Gap 2000, Third Annual Report and 50 State Survey, December
      One in five people in a soup kitchen line is a child (America's
       Second Harvest, Hunger 1997: The Faces & Facts).
      In 1999, approximately 12 million American children were
       hungry or at risk of hunger (United States Department of
       Agriculture, Household Food Security in the United States, Fall
      Families are the largest and fastest growing segment of the
       homeless population. New York City officials report a record of
       6,252 families with a total of 20, 655 members are lodging
       nightly in city shelters, with rapid increase. (Use of Shelters By
       Families Sets Record in City, New York Times; Metropolitan
       Desk, August 1, 2001). In 2000, requests for emergency food
       assistance from families with children increased by 16% in
       American cities over the past year, the highest rate of increase
       since the recession of 1991 (U.S. Conference of Mayors, Hunger
       and Homelessness in America's Cities, December 2000).
      Nearly 1 in 5 children (more than 12 million) in the U.S. live in
       poverty (U.S. Census Bureau, Current Population Survey,
       October 2000 Update). The U.S. child poverty rate is higher than
       that of most other industrialized nations.
      In 1999, more than half of all food stamp recipients, 9.3 million
       people were children (Children's Defense Fund, Poverty Matters:
       The Cost of Child Poverty in America, 2000).
      Nearly 9 million children in the U.S. live in working poor families
       (Center on Budget and Policy Priorities, The Poverty Despite
       Work Handbook, 1999).
      In its 1998 survey of 30 cities, the U.S. Conference of Mayors
       found that the homeless population was 49% African-American,
       32% Caucasian, 12% Hispanic, 4% Native American, and 3%
       Asian (U.S. Conference of Mayors, 1998).
      46% of cities surveyed by the U.S. Conference of Mayors
       identified domestic violence as a primary cause of homelessness
       (U.S. Conference of Mayors, 1998).
      Research indicates that 40% of homeless men have served in
       the armed forces, as compared to 34% of the general adult male
       population (Rosenheck, Robert, Homeless Veterans, in
       Homelessness in America, 1996).
      Approximately 20-25% of the single adult homeless population
       suffers from some form of severe and persistent mental illness
       (Koegel, Paul, The Causes of Homelessness, Homelessness in
       America, 1996, Oryx Press.). According to the Federal Task
       Force on Homelessness and Severe Mental Illness, only 5-7% of
       homeless persons with mental illness require institutionalization;
       most can live in the community with the appropriate supportive
       housing options (Federal Task Force on Homelessness and
       Severe Mental Illness, 1992).
      Recent research indicates that even mild under-nutrition
       experienced by young children during critical periods of growth
       may lead to reductions in physical growth and affect brain
       development (The Links Between Nutrition and Cognitive
       Development of Children, 1998, Tufts University School of
       Nutrition Science and Policy).
      There were record levels of homelessness in New York after the
       Sept 11 terrorist attacks. (New Wave of the Homeless Floods
       Cities' Shelters, The New York Times; National Desk, December
       18, 2001)

       * The 500,000-600,000 estimate is sometimes updated by
       using a projected rate of increase of 5% a year to produce
       an estimate of over 700,000 people homeless on any given
       night, and up to 2 million people who experience
       homelessness during one year. As a result of
       methodological and financial constraints, most studies are
       limited to counting people who are literally homeless --
       that is, in shelters or on the streets. While this approach
       may yield useful information about the number of people
       who use services such as shelters and soup kitchens, or
       who are easy to locate on the street, it can result in
       underestimates of homelessness.

Australia Homeless Statistics

The 2001 Population Census data:

      99,900 houseless people in Australia (105,304 in 1996)
      54% adults over 24 years of age
      10% under the age of 12 years
      36% young people between 12 and 24 years
      42% of houseless people were female
      58% were single (58,116)
      19% were couples (18,840)
      23% were families (22,944 people or 6,745 families

On census night in 2001, only 14,251 (14.25%) of people considered by the
census to be houseless were staying in services funded through the Supported
Accommodation Assistance Program (SAAP). SAAP, jointly funded by
Commonwealth and State Governments, provides funds for crisis services to
houseless people around the country.
Yhe following information relates only to SAAP clients (2002-2003 data)

      Male (42%)
      Female (58%)
      Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islanders (18%)
      People from non-English speaking backgrounds (14%)
      Average age of female clients: 30
      Average age of male clients: 33

People aged 18 and 19 years had the highest rate of SAAP service usage at 145
clients for every 10,000 in the general population.
The next highest usage rates were by 15-17 year olds and 20-24 year olds,
among whom there were 114 and 113 clients, respectively for every 10,000
Nationally, nearly one-third (31%) of support periods were provided to males
aged 25 years and over presenting alone at SAAP agencies and 21% were
provided to female clients with children.
Unaccompanied females aged 25 years and over accounted for 15%, while
unaccompanied males and females under 25 years accounted for around 13% of
support periods each.
Overall, 6% of support periods were for couples with or without children. Males
with children accounted for just 1% of all support periods.
Most common reasons for houselessness (SAAP survey):

      Domestic and family violence (22%)
      Eviction/previous accommodation ended (11%)
      Relationship/family breakdown (11%)
      Usual accommodation unavailable (11%)
      Financial Difficulty (10%)

The most common reasons for each client group are:
Male alone, aged under 25

      Usual accommodation unavailable (16.7%)
      Relationship/family breakdown (16.5%)
Male alone, aged 25 or over

      Financial difficulty (15.4 %)
      Usual accommodation unavailable (14.9%)

Female alone, aged under 25

      Relationship/family breakdown (21.5%)
      Domestic violence (12.3 %)

Female alone, aged 25 or over

      Domestic and Family Violence (43.9%)

Couple with no children

      Eviction/accommodation ended (21%)
      Financial difficulty (14%)

Couple with children

      Eviction/accommodation ended (26.7%)
      Usual accommodation unavailable (14.1%)

Male with children

      Eviction/accommodation ended (20.9%)
      Relationship/relationship breakdown (17.7%)

Female with children

      Domestic and Family Violence (51.8%)
      Eviction/accommodation ended (9.1%)

Canada Homeless Statistics

Shelter Occupancy Rates by Canadian Province March 2001
According to the 2001 census, the following occupancy rates in Canadian
shelters (meaning homeless shelters, halfway houses and emergency lodgings
for abused spouses and their children) on one day in March were reported as:
Canada 14,145 (total)
Ontario 6,100
Quebec 3,365
Alberta 1,935
British Columbia 1,085
Manitoba 885
New Brunswick 265
Saskatchewan 255
Nova Scotia 165
Newfoundland and Labrador 45
Northwest Territories 20
Yukon Territory 15
Prince Edward Island 5
Nunavut 5
"The data should not be interpreted as Canada's homeless population but the
number of people in shelters that day."
The statistics are fairly accurate for a "one day spot check," says Diane Morrison,
executive director of The Mission, a homeless shelter in Ottawa. The numbers
reflect only the month of May, when the census was taken.
"If the data had been taken during winter, when we experience our highest
occupancy rates, the results would have been quite different," she says.

United Kingdom Homeless Statistics

If you can work out what the situation is in the UK, please let us know. Their stats
are smoke and mirrors and completely unbelievable in my opinion. Either they
don't know (most likely), or don't want to say in plain statistics, or I'm just not
getting it.

United States Homeless Statistics

From the National Coalition for the Homeless: Poverty, Urban Institute and
specifically the National Survey of Homeless Assistance Providers, draw their
estimates from a study of service providers across the country at two different
times of the year in 1996.
They found that, on a given night in October, 444,000 people (in 346,000
households) experienced homelessness - which translates to 6.3% of the
population of people living in poverty. On a given night in February, 842,000 (in
637,000 households) experienced homelessness - which translates to almost
10% of the population of people living in poverty.
Converting these estimates into an annual projection, the numbers that emerge
are 2.3 million people (based on the October estimate) and 3.5 million people
(based on the February estimate).This translates to approximately 1% of the U.S.
population experiencing homelessness each year, 38% (October) to 39%
(February) of them being children (Urban Institute 2000).
It is also important to note that this study was based on a national survey of
service providers. Since not all people experiencing homelessness utilize service
providers, the actual numbers of people experiencing homelessness are likely
higher than those found in the study, Thus, we are estimating on the high end of
the study's numbers: 3.5 million people, 39% of which are children(Urban
Institute 2000).

United States Homeless Statistics
      The average age of a homeless person living in the US is nine years-old.
      3.5 million people (1.35 million of which are children) will experience
       homelessness in a given year.
      Children under the age of 18 account for 39% of the homeless population. 42% of
       these are under the age of 5.
      43% of the homeless population are women; 40% of these women are
       unaccompanied. 22% of homeless women claim domestic abuse as reason for
       homelessness. 25% of these claim to have been abused within the past year.
      Families with children comprise 33% of the homeless population.
      Vets constitute 40% of the homeless population.
      1 in every 5 homeless persons has a severe or persistent mental illness.
      25% of the homeless nationwide are employed.
Observers of modern homelessness often cite some of the following potential causes of

      The movement in the 1960s in state mental health systems to shift towards
       community-based treatment as opposed to long-term commitment in institutions.
       Unfortunately, absent local community housing programs, many patients ended
       up in the streets.
      The life decision to travel whether for religious, political, or personal reasons.
      The failure of urban housing projects to provide safe, secure, and affordable
       housing to the poor.
      The economic crises and "stagflation" of the 1970s, which caused high
       unemployment. Unlike European countries, US unemployment insurance does not
       allow unemployed insurance recipients to obtain job training/education while
       receiving benefits except under very limited situations.
      The failure of the U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs to provide effective mental
       health care and meaningful job training for many homeless veterans, particularly
       those of the Vietnam War. Many VA critics think homeless veterans are cycled
       through ineffective VA 12-step programs, restricting housing programs, and low
       skilled job training programs that actually keeps them cycling from program to
       program and back to living on the streets.
      Foster home children are not given job training in school or at home. Without a
       means to make money, nearly half of foster children in the United States become
       homeless when they are released from foster care at age 18. [1] [2]

According to the U.S. Conference of Mayors, the demand for emergency shelter in 270
U.S. cities increased 13% in 2001 and 25% in 2005. 22 percent of those requesting
emergency shelter were turned away. With budgets squeezed dry, cities across the U.S.
adopted a closed-door attitude toward the displaced. For example:

      The Port Authority of New York and New Jersey banned panhandling in PATH
       subway stations and bus terminals;
      In Atlanta, Georgia, Mayor Maynard Jackson proposed a policy of licensing
       panhandlers, it was not adopted.
      The University of California, Berkeley ordered repeated police sweeps of People's
       Park and evicted the People's Cafe soup kitchen.
      In Santa Cruz, California, dozens of homeless were repeatedly arrested for
       sleeping outside the local United States Post Office.

Traditionally single men have constituted the overwhelming majority of the homeless. In
the 1980s there was a sharp rise in the number of homeless families in certain parts of the
United States; notably New York City. Most homeless families consist of an unmarried
mother and children. A significant number of homeless people are teenagers and young
adults, mostly runaways or street children. A 1960 survey by Temple University of
Philadelphia's poor neighborhoods found that 75% of the homeless were over 45 years
old, and 87% were white. In 1986, 86% were under age 45, and 87% were minorities.
[edit] Definition

Homeless man in the East Village, New York City.
While there is no one agreed upon definition, one definition originally developed as part
of the McKinney-Vento Act of 1987 federal legislation,[3] describes a "homeless" person
as being:

   1. an individual who lacks a fixed, regular, and adequate nighttime residence;
   2. and an individual who has a primary nighttime residence that is--
          1. a supervised publicly or privately operated shelter designed to provide
              temporary living accommodations (including welfare hotels, congregate
              shelters, and transitional housing for the mentally ill);
          2. an institution that provides a temporary residence for individuals intended
              to be institutionalized; or
          3. a public or private place not designed for, or ordinarily used as, a regular
              sleeping accommodation for human beings.

Critics argue that such a definition does not account for all of those who are in-effect
homeless, and therefore excludes many needy individuals from certain federal assistance
programs who do not meet eligibility requirements. Proponents of an expanded definition
of homelessness cite certain at-risk living situations which some believe should be

      Multiple families (or individuals) doubling or tripling up in insufficient living
       space. One of many documented incidents reports 25 individuals sharing a single
      Weekly “rental” of economy motel rooms. With a growing lack of affordable
       housing across the country, low-wage earners are increasingly residing in cheap
       (and often ill-maintained) motels.[5]
      Individuals living in their automobiles. Often the vehicles used in such a manner
       do not even operate but simply provide shelter from the elements.
      Exclusive “couch-surfers.” Instead of sleeping on the streets or in a shelter,
       otherwise homeless persons are forced to rely on the hospitality of willing friends
       or family for a place to sleep. Patience for such arrangements often runs dry, and
       many soon find themselves without a place to stay.

Lastly, there is discrepancy over which defined segments of the homeless population are
most in need. The federal government is currently promoting a 10-year plan approach to
end homelessness which targets those who are “chronically” homeless—defined as, “An
unaccompanied homeless individual with a disabling condition who has either been
continuously homeless for a year or has had at least four (4) episodes of homelessness in
the past three (3) years.”[6] Many direct service providers are concerned that such a
definition will exclude the majority of those who experience homelessness from
receiving needed services.
This definition is not satisfactory to many providers, researchers and advocates, because
it misses the population of "hidden homeless" who are currently doubling-up with family
or friends. Some advocates also want "homelessness" to include those at serious risk of
homelessness, but not yet experiencing it.

[edit] Statistics and demographics

Completely accurate and comprehensive statistics are difficult to acquire for any social
study, but especially so when measuring the ambiguous, hidden, and erratic reality of
homelessness. All figures given are estimates. In addition, these estimates represent
overall national averages; the proportions of specific homeless communities can vary
substantially depending on local geography.
The mobile and often hidden nature of homelessness makes this group difficult to
accurately survey. The last rigorous attempt at estimating annual homeless prevalence in
the United States was undertaken by the 1996 National Survey of Homeless Assistance
Providers and Clients (NSHAPC).[7] Annual homeless prevalence was estimated at
between 1.58 million (based on October/November four-week count) to 3.49 million
(based on February seven day count).[8] Most, though not all, advocates use the higher
estimate of over 3 million, especially since homelessness is thought to have risen since
Lifetime homeless prevalence measured in 1990 by Bruce Link and colleagues found
7.4% or 13.5 million people reported experiencing literal homelessness.[9] These
estimates were tabulated from telephone interviews and thus most likely excluded all
currently homeless individuals.
Some estimates from various sources on the characteristics and number of homeless
Total Number

      As many as 3.5 million people experience homelessness in a given year (1% of
       the entire U.S. population or 10% of its poor), and about 842,000 people in any
       given week.[10]

Familial composition[11]

      40% are families with children—the fastest growing segment.
      41% are single males.
      14% are single females.
      5% are minors unaccompanied by adults.

1.37 million (or 39%) of the total homeless population are children under the age of

      49% are African American (compared to 11% of general population).
      35% are Caucasian (under-represented compared to 75% of general population).
      13% are Hispanic (compared to 10% of general population).
      2% are Native American (compared to 1% of general population).
      1% are Asian-American (under-represented compared to 4% of general


      22% are considered to have serious mental illnesses, or are disabled.
      30% have substance abuse problems.
      3% report having HIV/AIDS.
      26% report acute health problems other than HIV/AIDS such as tuberculosis,
       pneumonia, or sexually transmitted infections.
      46% report chronic health conditions such as high blood pressure, diabetes, or
      55% report having no health insurance (compared to 16% of general population).
      58% report having trouble getting enough food to eat.


      23% are veterans (compared to 13% of general population).
      25% were physically or sexually abused as children.
      27% were in foster care or similar institutions as children.
      21% were homeless at some point during their childhood.
      54% were incarcerated at some point in their lives.


      38% have less than a High School diploma.
      34% have a High School diploma or equivalent (G.E.D.).
      28% have more than a High School education.


      44% report having worked in the past week.
      13% have regular jobs.
      50% receive less than $300 per month as income.


      71% reside in central cities.
      21% are in suburbs.
      9% are in rural areas.


      80% of those who experience homelessness do so for less than 3 weeks. They
       typically have more personal, social, or economic resources to draw upon.
      10% are homeless for up to two months. They cite lack of available or affordable
       housing as responsible for the delay.
      10% are so called “chronic” and remain without housing for extended periods of
       time on a frequent basis. They typically struggle with mental illness, substance
       abuse, or both.

Somewhat different data seem to be presented in the full demographics reported in the
1996 NSHAPC survey which include:
Family status

      61% Single men
      15% Single women
      12.2% Women with children
      4.6% Other women
      5.3% Other men
      2.3% Men with children

Racial demographics of head of household

      41% White, non-Hispanic
      40% Black, non-Hispanic
      11% Hispanic
      8% Native American
      1% Other

Length of current homeless period

      5% Less than one week
      8% Greater than one week, less than one month
      15% One to three months
      11% Four to six months
      15% Seven to twelve months
      16% Thirteen to twenty four months
      10% Twenty-five to sixty months
      20% Five or more years

Lifetime self-reported alcohol, drug and mental health problems

      62% Alcohol
      58% Drugs
      57% Mental health
      27% Mental health and alcohol or drug (dual diagnosed)

[edit] Historical background
[edit] Pre-1960s
In general, many towns and cities had an area which contained the poor, transients, and
afflicted, such as a "skid row". In New York City, for example, there was an area known
as "the Bowery", traditionally, where alcoholics were to be found sleeping on the streets,
bottle in hand. This resulted in rescue missions, such as the oldest homeless shelter in
New York City, The Bowery Mission, founded in 1879 by the Rev. and Mrs. A.G.

The Bowery Mission in New York City in the 1800s
In smaller towns, there were hobos, who temporarily lived near train tracks and hopped
onto trains to various destinations. Especially following the American Civil War, a large
number of homeless men formed part of a counterculture known as "hobohemia" all over
Jacob Riis wrote about, documented, and photographed the poor and destitute, although
not specifically the homeless, in New York City tenements in the late 1800s. His ground-
breaking book, How the Other Half Lives, published in 1890, raised public awareness of
living conditions in the slums, causing some changes in building codes and some social

[edit] 1960s, 1970s

In the United States, in the late 1970s, the deinstitutionalisation of patients from state
psychiatric hospitals was a precipitating factor which seeded the homeless population,
especially in urban areas such as New York City.[22]
The Community Mental Health Act of 1963 was a pre-disposing factor in setting the
stage for homelessness in the United States.[23] Long term psychiatric patients were
released from state hospitals into SROs and sent to community health centers for
treatment and follow-up. It never quite worked out properly and this population largely
was found living in the streets soon thereafter with no sustainable support system.[24][25]
In 1969, Paul Sullivan, a real estate developer and himself a recovering alcoholic,
founded The Pine Street Inn, in Boston, to care for homeless destitute alcoholics, and get
them back into society.[26][27] He was awarded The Isaac Hecker Award for Social Justice
in 1980 for this work.[28][29]
The Diggers (a hippie group dedicated to the concept of everything being free of charge)
established soup kitchens and free health-care facilities located in San Francisco on the
Height and Ashbury in 1965. This also began a movement of people that began to travel
for political reasons as well as for personal choices. This is where the beginnings of the
American nomadic caravans became popular, living homelessly, but happily. In the
summer of 1972 was the first gathering of these nomads and they called it the "rainbow
gathering". It was located in Colorado and is a temporary gathering, to be set up every
year at the same time in a different state each year, and has grown to include many
regionals throughout the year in various states and cities. They are the people, the
caravans of North Americas' only nomadic tribe besides the Native Americans. Gathering
to preserve gathering rights of all Americans (the First Amendment), and choosing to live
In 1979, a New York City lawyer, Robert Hayes, brought a class action suit before the
courts, Callahan v. Carey, against the City and State, arguing for a person's state
constitutional "right to shelter". It was settled as a consent decree in August 1981. The
City and State agreed to provide board and shelter to all homeless men who met the need
standard for welfare or who were homeless by certain other standards. By 1983 this right
was extended to homeless women.

[edit] 1980s

In 1980 federal dollars accounted for 22% of big city budgets, but by 1989 the same such
aid composed only 6% of urban revenue (part of larger 60% decrease in federal spending
to support local governments).[30] It is largely (although not exclusively) in these urban
areas that homelessness became widespread and reached unprecedented numbers. Critics
of Reagan identify several main policy shifts as fundamental in the sharp rise of
Most notable were cuts to federal low-income housing programs. In his first year of
office Reagan halved the budget for public housing and Section 8 (the government’s
housing voucher subsidization program). Between the years of 1980 and 1989 HUD’s
budget authority was reduced from $74 billion to $19 billion.[31] Such changes resulted in
an inadequate supply of affordable housing to meet the growing demand of low-income
populations. In 1970 there were 300,000 more low-cost rental units (6.5 million) than
low-income renter households (6.2 million). By 1985 the number of low-cost units had
fallen to 5.6 million, and the number of low-income renter households had grown to 8.9
million, a disparity of 3.3 million units[32]
The 1980s also saw a continuing trend of deinstitutionalizing mental-health hospitals. It
is believed that a large percentage of these released patients ended up in the homeless
In response to the ensuing homelessness crisis of the 1980s, concerned citizens across the
country demanded that the federal government provide assistance. After many years of
advocacy and numerous revisions, Reagan signed into law the McKinney-Vento
Homeless Assistance Act in 1987—this remains the only piece of federal legislation that
allocates funding to the direct service of homeless people.
By the mid-1980s, there was also a dramatic increase in family homelessness. Tied into
this was an increasing number of impoverished and runaway children, teenagers, and
young adults, which created a new sub-stratum of the homeless population.
In August 1988, a riot erupted in New York City's Tompkins Square Park when police
brutally attempted to enforce a newly-passed curfew for the park, largely in an attempt to
evict the homeless who were living in the park. Bystanders, artists, residents, homeless
people and political activists were caught up in the police action that took place on the
night of August 6 and the early morning of August 7. The event has become known as the
Tompkins Square Park Police Riot.[33]
Several organisations in some cities, such as New York and Boston, tried to be inventive
about help to the swelling number of homeless people. In New York City, for example, in
1989, the first street newspaper was created called "Street News" which put some
homeless to work, some writing, producing, and mostly selling the paper on streets and
trains.[34] It was written pro bono by a combination of homeless, celebrities, and
established writers.

[edit] 1990s

The McKinney-Vento Act paved the way for service providers in the coming years.
During the 1990s homeless shelters, soup kitchens, and other supportive services
sprouted up in cities and towns across the nation. However, despite these efforts and the
dramatic economic growth marked by this decade, homeless numbers remained
stubbornly high. It became increasingly apparent that simply providing services to
alleviate the symptoms of homelessness (i.e. shelter beds, hot meals, psychiatric
counseling, etc.), although needed, were not successful at solving the root causes of
homelessness. However, critics claim that Bill Clinton’s 1996 welfare reforms increased
the number of families entering homelessness.[citation needed] At any rate, policies set into
motion in the 1980s were never adequately reversed during the Bush Senior or Clinton
administrations; conditions, therefore, remained ripe for becoming homeless.[citation needed]

[edit] 2000s

In 2002, research showed that children and families were the largest growing segment of
the homeless in America,[35][36] and this has presented new challenges, especially in
services, to agencies. Back in the 1990s, a teenager from New York, Liz Murray, was
homeless at fifteen years old, and overcame that and went on to study at Harvard
University. Her story was made into an Emmy-winning film in 2003, "Homeless to
The Interagency Council on Homelessness (ICH), the federal branch responsible for
overseeing homeless policy that was created under the McKinney-Vento Act, is now
attempting a new approach to combat homelessness. For the first time, government
officials are calling for an end to homelessness. To accomplish this goal ICH has adopted
a strategy largely devised by the National Alliance to End Homelessness (one of many
homeless advocacy organizations), which centers on the production and implementation
of local 10-year plans to end chronic homelessness. The idea is to get all of the necessary
parties—local/state governmental agencies, businesses, non-profit organizations, service
providers, faith-based entities, and homeless (or formally so) individuals—working in
collaboration to devise and implement a 10-year plan for their respective community.[37]
Rather than channeling funds into direct services that seemingly sustain homeless
lifestyles, these result-oriented plans are designed to focus efforts and funds on the
creation of permanent supportive housing (PSH) for the most troubled and difficult,
“chronic” homeless population. Considering that it is actually cheaper to house someone
than it is to fund the otherwise needed myriad services, this approach is touted as being a
cost-effective solution.[38]
Many service providers applaud the government’s focus on ending homelessness, as
opposed to managing it, and realize the necessity of incorporating all sectors of society in
order to accomplish such a goal. However, critics express concern that the majority of the
homeless population, who are not considered “chronic,” will be neglected; if federal
funds are stipulated only for this 10% demographic—although no doubt deserving—what
will become of the other 90%? These concerns are exacerbated by a failure to receive
sufficient additional allocations while already struggling with budgets spread extremely
Presently, no plan has been in effect for a full 10-years so achievement is difficult to
gauge; the best indications reveal mixed success. Although many cities have seen chronic
numbers dip, it is unclear whether or not homelessness as a whole is decreasing. The
hope is that necessary modifications can be made to existing plans, and that newly
devised plans can implement the strategies that work and avoid the ones that don’t.

[edit] Causes
In the simplest terms, a household becomes homeless when its provider(s) can no longer
pay for housing, and this phenomenon happens overwhelmingly among the poorest of the
nation. Therefore, experts in the field see a direct correlation between recent increases in
poverty levels and increases in homelessness. In an attempt to understand why some
people in poverty experience homelessness, and why some don’t, both structural and
personal dynamics must be considered.

[edit] Structural factors

Housing Opportunities
      There are three aspects of the current housing market that are as equally pivotal in
      causing homelessness:

   1. Housing costs, particularly for rental housing which disproportionately affect
      lower income households, are rising drastically. In the five years 1999 through
      2004, rental price of primary residences rose by 19% and the consumer price
      index (CPI-U) rose by only 13%[39]--the price of housing, in other words, is
      outpacing the rate of inflation. There is not a single jurisdiction in the country
      where a person working 40 hours a week, 52 weeks a year at the prevailing
      minimum wage can afford a one-bedroom apartment.[40] Aside from just low
      wage earners, many workers cannot afford to live where they work, and even in
      moderately priced communities housing costs continually require a larger portion
      of a household’s annual income.[41]
   2. Although residential construction has been robust in recent years, zoning and the
      implementation of rent controls has reduced the profitability of constructing low
      income housing. In 2003 there was a supply deficiency of 1.7 million units of
      housing to meet the demand of 7.7 million extremely low income (ELI) renting
   3. Government housing-assistance programs are massively over-burdened.
      Currently, only one-fourth of all eligible families receive any federal housing
      assistance due to program funding constraints,[43] and the average wait for Section
      8 vouchers is 35 months.[44]

Health care opportunities
       In 2004, 45.8 million Americans (or 15.7% of the population) were without health
       insurance, which was an increase from the year before, and was
       disproportionately represented by poor households.[45] The U.S. spends 16% of its
       GDP on health care, more than any other industrialized nation, and those
       countries provide health insurance to all of their citizens.[46]

   1. Health care costs are skyrocketing. In 2004, total national health expenditures
      rose 7.9 percent—over three times the rate of inflation—and since 2000,
      employment-based health insurance premiums have increased 73%.[47]
   2. People working low wage jobs, even if they work full-time, are less likely to be
      provided with health insurance. For example, Wal-Mart—the largest employer in
      the nation—does not provide health coverage for over half of its employees, who
      on average earn $8.23 an hour.[48]
   3. Without health insurance and under increasing medical costs, unexpected health
      emergencies or serious chronic illnesses can quickly overburden the resources of
      poor households.

[edit] Personal factors

      Untreated mental illness, and disability can cause individuals to become paranoid,
       anxious, or depressed, making it difficult or impossible to maintain employment,
       pay bills, or keep supportive social relationships.
      Substance abuse can drain financial resources, cause job or housing loss, and
       erode supportive social relationships. Substance abuse is quite prevalent in the
       homeless population.[49]
      Lack of education, such as dropping out of school which in turn is an obstacle in
       finding a high paying job and residence.
      Co-occurring disorders. Individuals with co-occurring mental illnesses and
       substance use disorders are among the most susceptible to the above mentioned
      Many people (especially women and often with children) who flee from domestic
       violence often must quickly adapt to massive life changes. Many find it extremely
       difficult to secure a new place of residence and/or a job.
      Institutional release. Most individuals being discharged from prison have few
       resources to “get back on their feet” and have eroded personal contacts that may
       provide support. Youths who “age out” of systems such as foster care often find
       themselves without needed support networks.

[edit] Other factors

Lastly, it should be mentioned that some people find themselves homeless due to
unexpected extenuating circumstances:
      Natural disasters: Many people lose their homes to any variety of natural
       catastrophes including but not limited to: floods, forest fires, storms, and
       earthquakes. In 2005 hurricanes Katrina and Rita displaced over 1 million
       Americans. Tornadoes destroyed entire towns in Tennessee in 2006.

      Unexpected emergencies: A variety of people find themselves unable to cope with
       any number of the following sudden tragedies: being laid off from a long-term
       place of employment; losing their place of residence to an accidental fire; serious
       bodily injuries; discovery of terminal illnesses or diseases; loss of family
       member(s). These situations usually result not only in significant monetary
       expenses, but also in severe psychological and emotional hardships.

[edit] Fighting poverty

If homelessness is inextricably linked to poverty, then without alleviation of the most
crippling aspects of poverty, homelessness can never be effectively ended. In particular,
three main concerns are the focus of both governmental and non-governmental (NGO)
efforts to end homelessness:
More affordable housing
Homeless individuals report a lack of affordable housing as the number one reason for
becoming homeless.[50] This inadequacy must be remedied in order to get people off the
streets and out of shelters. Many non-profit organizations are in operation to serve this
need—for example, the National Low Income Housing Coalition—but most lack the
funding necessary to create enough housing. Several proposed policy measures are
designed to secure such funding, such as the National Housing Trust Fund, but these have
not been signed into law.
Livable wages
Homeless individuals report a lack of adequate pay as the number two reason for
becoming homeless.[51] As housing costs have continued to rise and the value of wages
has either declined or remained stagnate, the poor are increasingly unable to afford
whatever housing is available. Many campaigns promote a living wage that would
increase pay to an amount purported to cover living expenses. Since the cost of living
(especially that of housing) varies widely from area-to-area there is discrepancy over how
much wages should be increased. One campaign, the Universal Living Wage, offers a
unique formula that indexes the base wage of a particular locality with its respective cost
of housing.
Comprehensive health care
Homeless individuals report mental illness as being the number three reason for
becoming or staying homeless.[52] Such illnesses are often closely linked with the fourth
reason—substance abuse—and therefore it is generally accepted that both of these issues
should be treated simultaneously. Although many medical, psychiatric, and counseling
services exist to address these needs, it is commonly believed that without the support of
reliable and stable housing such treatments remain ineffective. Furthermore, in the
absence of a universal health-care plan, many of those in need cannot afford such
services. Legislation such as the Brining America Home Act, if enacted, would provide
comprehensive and available treatment for all.
Paradigm shift
A significant paradigm has occurred in homeless services over the past five years which
has began to shift the emphasis from "managing the problem of homelessness" with
emergency shelters, soup kitchens and health clinic to ending homelessness by housing
individuals who are experiencing homelessness. In 2001, the National Alliance to End
Homelessness [13] released "A Plan to End Homelessness" which encouraged
communities to develop and implement a 10 year plan to end or reduce homelessness in
their communities.
Key effective programs include:

      Shelter Plus Care - a federal program that provides housing subsidies and are
       matched by local funds to provide long-term supportive services (typically case
       management). Experience demonstrated that many individuals who have been
       homeless for a significant time often lose their housing shortly after placement.
       The Shelter Plus Care program provides long-term supports including working
       with the landlord to keep the individual housed.

      Housing First - a service paradigm that assumes that individuals who are
       homeless are "ready" to be housed immediately and with appropriate supports can
       retain their housing. The Pathways to Housing project in New York demonstrated
       a five-year housing retention rate of 88 percent among formerly homeless
       individuals with serious mental illness. Many homeless people are required to
       participate in year-long plus substance abuse, mental health, and life skills
       programs when they don't even have those problems. Many people only need
       decent housing to get back on their feet. Central City Concern's (Portland, OR)
       Shoreline Project allows homeless unemployed men to move into SRO type
       single person studios and find a job within 70 days; it's been a great success with
       expected expansion of the program in 2007.

      Assertive Outreach - a form of engagement and outreach that emphasizes building
       a bond of trust between the case worker and the individual. Engagement is highly
       individualized with the pace dictated by the individual in need. Case workers do
       not force rules, regulations or program services until they are requested. Typically
       used to engage homeless, mentally ill individuals.lie i am the richest man in the us

[edit] Additional issues

The present difficultly is to address these root issues while at the same time providing for
the real and immediate needs of people experiencing homelessness. Many service
providing organizations (including governmental departments) feel pulled between the
need to provide shelter, food, and health-care, but also ensure that affordable housing and
adequate wages are made available. Furthermore, those that provide direct service for the
homeless often feel they are forced to “clean-up” the failures and shortcomings of other
institutions that are not being held accountable. Most notably, people from this position
assert that the discharge policies of both prisons and foster care programs often leave
those exiting such institutions with no other option than homelessness. Such topics must
be addressed in the fight to end homelessness.

[edit] Public attitudes
Many advocates for the homeless contend that a key difficulty is the social stigma
surrounding homelessness. There is anecdotal evidence that many Americans complain
about the presence of homeless people, blame them for their situation, and feel that their
requests for money or support (usually via begging) are unjustified. In the 1990s,
particularly, many observers and media articles spoke of "compassion fatigue," a belief
that the public had grown weary of this seemingly intractable problem.
Public opinion surveys show relatively little support for this view, however. A 1995
paper in the American Journal of Community Psychology concluded that "although the
homeless are clearly stigmatized, there is little evidence to suggest that the public has lost
compassion and is unwilling to support policies to help homeless people." [53] A Penn
State study in 2004 concluded that "familiarity breeds sympathy" and greater support for
addressing the problem.[54] A 2007 survey of New Yorkers found 67 percent said most
homeless people were without shelter because of "circumstances beyond their control."
More than one-third (36 percent) said they worried about becoming homeless themselves,
with 15 percent saying they were "very worried." The survey by the nonpartisan group
Public Agenda found support for investments in prevention, rental assistance and
permanent housing.[55]
Public Agenda has also concluded, however, that the public's sympathy has limits. In a
2002 national survey, the organization found 74 percent say the police should leave a
homeless person alone if he or she isn't bothering anyone. Yet 71 percent say the police
should move the homeless if they are keeping customers away from a shopping area and
51 percent say the homeless should be moved if they are driving other people away from
a public park.[56]

[edit] Homeless assistance programs
On any given night, as of 2006, nearly a million people will be homeless, despite a two
billion dollar a year infrastructure designed to deal with the problem.[citation needed] Even in
the face of 1990s economic prosperity, homeless statistics show the number of homeless
has remained high. Homelessness in America persists in part because many urban areas
remain economically depressed. Housing costs are rising and wages remain the same.
The most proximate cause of homelessness is poverty. The homeless spend more time in
hospitals and jails but are usually reluctant to accept help and transitional housing. The
following programs and policies attack the problem of homelessness, provide help to the
homeless, and prevent further growth of the homeless population.

[edit] Programs

Many programs that are designed to assist the homeless population have incorporated
some type of housing program for their clients. Whether it is a transitional, permanent or
even emergency housing program, the assistance is often provided for a very low cost
and maybe even free. Volunteers of America is an agency that believes preventing family
homelessness is a critical part of their organization. Through Volunteers of America,
transitional housing and emergency shelters are available to those who are in desperate
need. In the United States each year, there are around 3.5million people who live their
lives without shelter or a stable occupation. For 2006 alone, $28.5 billion is being allotted
to homeless programs ran through HUD (Housing and Urban Development). $1 billion is
being given for Section 8 housing, and $1.4 billion is being used for Homeless Assistance
Grants. The two main types of housing programs provided for homeless people are:

      Transitional

       Transitional housing programs are operated with one goal in mind– to help
       individuals and families obtain permanent housing as quickly as possible.
       Transitional housing programs assist homeless for a fixed amount of time or until
       they are able to obtain housing on their own and function successfully in the
       community, or whichever comes first.

      Permanent

        For a significant number of homeless Americans with mental or physical
        impairments, often coupled with drug and/or alcohol use issues, long-term
        homelessness can only be ended by providing permanent housing coupled with
        intensive supportive services. Permanent housing provides a “base” for people to
        move out of poverty.
Some shelters and associated charitable foundations have bought buildings and real estate
to develop into permanent housing for the homeless in lieu of transitional Housing.[57]
Substance abuse prevention
Without supportive services, housing is not often enough to end homelessness. Various
agencies, in fact all homeless prevention agencies and programs include substance abuse
recovery and prevention programs. Objectives are to provide substance abuse counseling
and access to treatment centers.
For a significant number of homeless Americans with mental or physical impairments,
often coupled with drug and/or alcohol use issues, long-term homelessness can only be
ended by providing permanent housing coupled with intensive supportive services.
Most homeless people have no means of communications with the outside world. Few
have access to a phone to make or receive calls, get voice messages, send or receive
email. Many support organisations provide some limited local phone access, voice mail,
and internet computers with email. This is critical in the modern world for medical
appointment verification, job and services searches.[58]

[edit] Policies
There are several policies dealing with homelessness. In 1980 the government decided to
start sending funding to the homeless, but it was not until 1984 that shelters were built to
accommodate and feed them. At it was shown though seventy percent required the
homeless to attend a religious ceremony and spend only a couple of nights there. In the
1987 McKinney Act the problem with homelessness became known as a huge social
problem. Later on, the No Child Left Behind Act of 2001 (P.L. 107-110) amended the
program explicitly to prohibit states that receive McKinney-Vento funds from
segregating homeless students from non-homeless students, except for short periods of
time for health and safety emergencies or to provide temporary, special, supplementary
services. The Chronic Homelessness Initiative. The Bush Administration has established
a national goal of ending chronic homelessness in 10 years, by 2012. The idea of a 10-
year plan to end chronic homelessness began as a part of a 10-year plan to end
homelessness in general adopted by the National Alliance to End Homelessness (NAEH)
in 2000. The following year, then-Secretary Martinez announced HUD’s commitment to
ending chronic homelessness at the NAEH annual conference. In 2002, as a part of his
FY2003 budget, President Bush made “ending chronic homelessness in the next decade a
top objective.” The bi-partisan, congressionally-mandated, Millennial Housing
Commission, in its Report to Congress in 2002, included ending chronic homelessness in
10 years among its principal recommendations. By 2003, the Interagency Council on
Homelessness had been re-engaged12 and charged with pursuing the President’s 10-year
plan. The Administration has recently undertaken some collaborative efforts to reach its
goal of ending chronic homelessness in 10 years. On October 1, 2003, the Administration
announced the award of over $48 million in grants aimed at serving the needs of the
chronically homeless through two initiatives. The Ending Chronic Homelessness
through Employment and Housing initiative was a collaborative grant offered jointly
by HUD and the Department of Labor (DOL). The initiative offered $10 million from
HUD and $3.5 million from DOL to help the chronically homeless in five communities
gain access to employment and permanent housing. Section 8 is the core housing
program that helps extremely low-income families accommodate the gap between their
incomes below 30 percent of the median income for each community. The government
assists homeless families by awarding grants and vouchers. Vouchers are available to the
families who are most needy and they are used to pay for housing found in the private
market. Currently there are policy changes in who receives vouchers and there will be a
reduction in the amount of vouchers granted to the homesless population.

[edit] Housing First

Housing first is a relatively recent innovation that has met with success in providing
housing to homeless people with substance abuse problems or mental health issues.
Housing First allows homeless men and women to be taken directly off the street into
private community-based apartments, without requiring treatment first. This allows the
homeless to return to some sense of normalcy, from which it is believed that they are
better-poised to tackle their addictions or sicknesses. The relapse rate through these types
of programs is lower than that of conventional homeless programs.
It was initiated by the federal government's Interagency Council on Homelessness. It asks
cities to come up with a plan to end chronic homelessness. In this direction, there is the
belief that if homeless people are given independent housing to start off with, with some
proper social supports, then there would be no need for emergency homeless shelters,
which it considers a good outcome. This is a very controversial position.[59]

[edit] Target

      Women

       Due to the increase of homeless women with children, there is growing interest in
       providing shelter and rehabilitaion for this group of individuals. One of the
       primary sources of funding for women (almost always including children) is
       TANF-Temporary Assistance for Needy Families. Funds are allocated for
       programs that enforce child-support, education, domestic abuse and housing most

      Children

       Unaccompanied homeless youth between the ages of 16 and 24 have been
       estimated to make up as much as 12 percent of the homeless population.
       Numerous studies of homeless youth have found experiences of physical and
       sexual abuse, parental drug or alcohol use, childhood homelessness, foster care,
       and juvenile detention. Critics contend mainstream homeless programs fail to
       meet the unique needs of homeless youth. Ending youth homelessness requires a
       coordinated effort involving a variety of services including support for youth
       discharged from foster care and the juvenile justice system, access to education
       for youth at risk of becoming homeless, and additional research to help advocates
       better understand the needs of homeless youth.

      Families

Each homeless client is an adult representing a homeless household. 15 percent of these
are family households (that is, the clients have one or more of their own children under
age 18 with them). On average, each homeless family household includes 2.2 minor
children of the client.

[edit] Criminalization of homelessness
Directly related to the above-mentioned stigmatization is a growing trend in the United
States towards criminalizing the state of being homeless.[60] Proponents of this approach
believe that punitive measures will deter people from “choosing” to be homeless. To this
end, cities across the country increasingly outlaw life-sustaining activities—such as
sleeping, eating, sitting, and begging—in public spaces, and selectively enforce more
neutral laws—such as those prohibiting open containers or loitering—against homeless
populations.[61] Violators of such laws typically incur criminal penalties, which result in
fines and/or incarceration. Many believe this trend is a manifestation of so-called
NIMBYism, or Not In My Back Yard syndrome—an unofficial policy that tolerates
social nuisances (like homelessness) as long as they are not visible or intrusive in a
particular community. Homeless people with new "criminal charges" have very
restrictive housing and employment options, if either, for years.
In April, 2006 the U.S. 9th District Court ruled that "making it a crime to be homeless
by charging them with a crime is in violation of the 8th and 14th Amendments." [14]
The following are pertinent excerpts of that transcript vs corresponding illegal laws:
L.A., Cal., Mun. Code ss 41.18(d) (2005). A violation of section 41.18(d) is punishable by a fine of up to
$1000 and/or imprisonment of up to six months. - Id. ss 11.00(m).

         The City could not expressly criminalize the status of homelessness by
         making it a crime to be homeless without violating the Eighth
         Amendment, nor can it criminalize acts that are an integral aspect of that
         status. Because there is substantial and undisputed evidence that the
         number of homeless persons in Los Angeles far exceeds the number of
         available shelter beds at all times, including on the nights of their arrest or
         citation, Los Angeles has encroached upon Appellants' Eighth
         Amendment protections by criminalizing the unavoidable act of sitting,
         lying or sleeping at night while being involuntarily homeless. The defense
         encompasses the very difficulties that Jones posits here: sleeping on the
         streets because alternatives were inadequate and economic forces were
         primarily to blame for his predicament. Id. at 390. Jones argues that he and
         other homeless people are not willing or able to pursue such a defense
         because the costs of pleading guilty are so low and the risks and
         challenges of pleading innocent are substantial.

- id. at 568 n.31 (Fortas, J., dissenting); the Eighth Amendment prohibits the City from punishing
involuntary sitting, lying, or sleeping on public sidewalks that is an unavoidable consequence of being
human and homeless without shelter in the City of Los Angeles.

         By our decision, we in no way dictate to the City that it must provide
         sufficient shelter for the homeless, or allow anyone who wishes to sit, lie,
         or sleep on the streets of Los Angeles at any time and at any place within
         the City. All we hold is that, so long as there is a greater number of
         homeless individuals in Los Angeles than the number of available beds,
         the City may not enforce section 41.18(d) at all times and places
         throughout the City against homeless individuals for involuntarily sitting,
         lying, and sleeping in public.

In August 2007, in Boston, Massachusetts, the city took action to keep loiterers,
including the homeless, off the Boston Common overnight, after a series of violent
crimes and drug arrests.[62]

[edit] Crimes against homeless people
Recent years have seen a growing number of violent acts committed upon people
experiencing homelessness—the rate of such documented crimes in 2005 was 30%
higher than of those in 1999.[63] 75% of all perpetrators are under the age of 25.
In recent years, largely due to the efforts of the National Coalition for the Homeless
(NCH) and academic researchers, the problem of violence against the homeless has
gained national attention. In Hate, Violence, and Death on Mainstreet USA, the NCH
reported 386 violent acts committed against homeless persons over the period, among
which 156 were lethal. The NCH called those acts hate crimes (they retain the definition
of the American Congress). They insist that so called bumfight videos disseminate hate
against the homeless and dehumanize them. The Center for the Study of Hate &
Extremism (CSHE) at California State University, San Bernardino in conjunction with
the NCH found that while 155 homeless people were killed by domiciled people in "hate
killings" from, only 76 people were killed in all the other traditional hate crime homicide
categories, such as race and religion, combined. The CSHE contends that negative and
degrading portrayals of the homeless contribute to a climate where violence takes place.
Various studies and surveys indicate that homeless people have a much higher criminal
victimization rate than domiciled people, but that most incidents never get reported to
authorities. On October 1, 2006 CBS News 60 Minutes telecast a story on "thrill"
violence against the homeless and "Bumfights" videos.
A recent study in 2007 found that the number of violent crimes against the homeless is

[edit] Responses

Critics of homeless criminalization claim that such measures do nothing to actually solve
homelessness and in fact make matters worse. Homeless people find it harder to secure
employment, housing, or federal benefits with a criminal record, and therefore penalizing
the act of being homeless makes exiting such a situation much more difficult. In fact, a
recent federal appeals court ruled an anti-homeless policy in Los Angeles as
unconstitutional.[66] Similarly, in response to growing reports of hate crimes, some state
governments have proposed the addition of “people experiencing homelessness” to their
hate-crimes statutes. Many credit the advocacy work of organizations such as the
National Coalition for the Homeless—which publishes annual reports documenting both
hate crimes[67] and criminalization[68] trends—for shedding light on these largely
neglected issues.

[edit] Situations in specific U.S. cities
The Los Angeles region is thought to have the largest concentration of homeless persons
in the country. In its biannual census of 2005, the County counted nearly 90,000
homeless persons living in the county at any given night. A quarter of a million are
expected to be homeless at any time of the year. A 50-block area in downtown Los
Angeles called Skid Row has a homeless population as large as the homeless population
of San Francisco. Hollywood and the city of Santa Monica also suffer from visible
homelessness. To combat homelessness, public and private service providers launched a
new initiative called Bring LA Home, a program that would build 50,000 housing units
for homeless persons and end homelessness within 10 years.
The city of San Francisco, California, due to its mild climate and its social programs that
have provided cash payments for homeless individuals, is often considered the
homelessness capital of the United States. The city's homeless population has been
estimated at 7,000-10,000 people. It is believed that New York, which is 10 times as
large in population, has only 5 times as many homeless individuals [citation needed]. On May
3, 2004 [15], San Francisco officially began an attempt to scale back the scope of its
homelessness problem by changing its strategy from cash payments to the so-called
"Care Not Cash" plan. At the same time, grassroots organizations within the Bay Area
such as the Suitcase Clinic work to provide referrals for housing and employment to the
homeless population.
The city of Chicago, Illinois is also noted for its number of homeless people. Over the
years, Chicago has gained a reputation as the city with the most homeless people, rivaling
Los Angeles and New York, although no statistical data has backed this up. The
reputation stems primarily from the subjective number of beggars found on the streets
rather than any sort of objective statistical census data. Indeed, from statistical data,
Chicago has far less homeless per capita than peers New York, and Los Angeles, or other
major cities Philadelphia, San Francisco, and Boston, among others.
In Denver, Colorado, Mayor John Hickenlooper has made dealing with the issues that
underlie homelessness a top priority on his Mayoral agenda, speaking heavily on the
issue during his first "State of the City" address in 2003. While Denver's homeless
population is much lower than other major cities, the homeless residents have often
suffered when without shelter during Denver's infamously cold winters.[16]
In [17] Indianapolis, Indiana, as many as 2,200 people are homeless on any given night,
and as many as 15,000 individuals over the course of a year. Indianapolis is notable
among cities of similar size for having only faith-based shelters, such as the century-old
[18]Wheeler Mission. In 2001, Mayor Bart Peterson endorsed a 10-year plan, called the
[19]Blueprint to End Homelessness, and made it one of his administration's top priorities.
The plan's main goals are for more affordable housing units, employment opportunities,
and support services. The Blueprint notwithstanding, Indianapolis has criminalized
aspects of homelessness, such as making panhandling a misdemeanor; and the [20]City-
County Council has twice (in April, 2002, and August, 2005) denied the zoning necessary
to open a new shelter for homeless women.
The city of San Antonio, Texas also has an abundance of homeless people. This was
spoofed in the South Park episode, Night of the Living Homeless, saying that homeless
people came from San Antonio. In the episode, they were eventually sent to California,
citing that Californians are "good to the homeless".

[edit] Health concerns
There has been concern about the transmission of diseases in the homeless population
housed in shelters, and the people who work there, especially with Tuberculosis. [69]

[edit] References
   1.   ^ Piasecki, Joe, "Throwaway kids: Thousands of area foster children leave county care for a
        dangerous and desperate life on the streets", Pasadena Weekly, June 22, 2006.
   2.   ^ Fagan, Kevin, "Saving foster kids from the streets", San Francisco Chronicle, Sunday, April 11,
3.    ^ Department of Housing and Urban Development: General Definition of Homeless Individual.
4.    ^ New York Times: Despite City Crackdown....
5.    ^ see Nickel and Dimed by Barbara Ehrenreich
6.    ^ Health and Human Services: Defining Chronic Homelessness.
7.    ^ United States Department of Housing and Urban Development, "Homelessness:Programs and
      the People They Serve", a summary of the NSHAPC survey. [1]
8.    ^ Burt, Aaron, Lee & Valente. 2001. Helping America's Homeless. Washington, DC: Urban
9.    ^ Link et al,. 1994. Lifetime and Five-Year Prevalence of Homelessness in the United States.
      American Journal of Public Health, Vol 84:12:1907-1912.
10.   ^ Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration: Who is homeless?.
11.   ^ National Coalition for the Homeless Who is homeless?.
12.   ^ National Coalition for the Homeless: Who is Homeless?.
13.   ^ National Coalition for the Homeless Who is homeless?.
14.   ^ Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration: Who is homeless?.
15.   ^ Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration: Who is homeless?.
16.   ^ Urban Institute: Homelessness: Programs and the People They Serve.
17.   ^ Urban Institute. Homelessness: Programs and the People They Serve
18.   ^ Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration: Who is homeless?.
19.   ^ Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration: How many are homeless? Why?.
20.   ^ The Bowery Mission [2] For a history see [3]
21.   ^ Depastino, Todd, "Citizen Hobo: How a Century of Homelessness Shaped America" [4]
22.   ^ Scherl D.J., Macht L.B., "Deinstitutionalization in the absence of consensus", Hospital and
      Community Psychiatry, 1979 Sep;30(9):599-604 [5]
23.   ^ Rochefort, D.A., "Origins of the 'Third psychiatric revolution': the Community Mental Health
      Centers Act of 1963", Journal of Health Politics, Policy and Law, 1984 Spring;9(1):1-30. [6]
24.   ^ Feldman, S., "Out of the hospital, onto the streets: the overselling of benevolence", Hastings
      Center Report, 1983 Jun;13(3):5-7. [7]
25.   ^ Borus J.F., "Sounding Board. Deinstitutionalization of the chronically mentally ill", New
      England Journal of Medicine, 1981 6 August;305(6):339-42. [8]
26.   ^ On The Pine Street Inn
27.   ^ "No Angels Here: The Closing of the Pine Street Inn Nurses Clinic, 1972–2003", by Grace
      Elizabeth Moore, Harvard Divinity School, Center for the Study of World Religions
28.   ^ Paulist Center, Boston, awards profiles
29.   ^ Issac Hecker Award for Social Justice
30.   ^ Common Dreams: Urban Suffering Grew Under Reagan.
31.   ^ Common Dreams: Urban Suffering Grew Under Reagan.
32.   ^ National Housing Institute: Reagan's Legacy: Homelessness in America.
33.   ^ "Melee in Tompkins Sq. Park: Violence and Its Provocation," by Todd Purdham, The New York
      Times, August 14, 1988, Section 1; Part 1, Page 1, Column 4; Metropolitan Desk
34.   ^ Harman, Dana, "Read all about it: street papers flourish across the US", The Christian Science
      Monitor, November 17, 2003. [9]
35.   ^ FACS, "Homeless Children, Poverty, Faith and Community: Understanding and Reporting the
      Local Story", March 26, 2002 Akron, Ohio. [10]
36.   ^ National Coalition for the Homeless, "Homeless Youth" 2005 [11]
37.   ^ Interagency Council on the Homeless, "10-Year Plans to End Chronic Homelessness", [12]
38.   ^ The New Yorker: Million-Dollar Murray.
39.   ^ zFacts: Housing Costs Rising Faster than Inflation.
40.   ^ National Low Income Housing Coalition: Facts Sheet.
41.   ^ Center for Housing Policy: Paycheck to Paycheck.
42.   ^ Center for Housing Policy: Paycheck to Paycheck.
43.   ^ Center on Budget and Policy Priorities: President's budget would slash major housing program
      by 30% by 2009.
44.   ^ National Coalition for the Homeless: Why are people homeless?.
45.   ^ U.S. Census Bureau: Income, Poverty, and Health Insurance Coverage in the United States:
  46.   ^ National Coalition on Health Care: Health Insurance Cost.
  47.   ^ National Coalition on Health Care: Health Insurance Cost.
  48.   ^ United Food and Commercial Workers: Wal-Martization of Health Care.
  49.   ^ cf. Booth, Koegel, et al. "Vulnerability Factors for Homelessness Associated with Substance
        Dependence in a Community Sample of Homeless Adults", 2002.
  50.   ^ City Mayors Society: Big U.S. Cities Report Steep Rise in Hunger and Homelessness.
  51.   ^ City Mayors Society: Big U.S. Cities Report Steep Rise in Hunger and Homelessness.
  52.   ^ City Mayors Society: Big U.S. Cities Report Steep Rise in Hunger and Homelessness.
  53.   ^ American Journal of Community Psychology: "Public knowledge, attitudes, and beliefs about
        homeless people: evidence for compassion fatigue.",23 August 1995.
  54.   ^ American Sociological Association: "Exposure to the Homeless Increases Sympathetic Public
        Attitudes", press release, 22 March 2004.
  55.   ^ Public Agenda: "Compassion, Concern and Conflicted Feelings: New Yorkers on Homelessness
        and Housing", 2007.
  56.   ^ Public Agenda: "The Homeless: As Long as They Don't Bother Anybody... ", Red Flags on
        Poverty, retrieved 28 April 2007.
  57.   ^ Kooker, Naomi R., "Pine St. adds to permanent housing holdings", Boston Business Journal,
        November 3, 2006.
  58.   ^ Allis, Sam. "A port in the storm Center gives homeless a phone and a chance", The Boston
        Globe, Globe Newspaper Company, May 14, 2006.
  59.   ^ Graves, Florence; Sayfan, Hadar, "First things first: 'Housing first,' a radical new approach to
        ending chronic homelessness, is gaining ground in Boston", Boston Globe, Sunday, June 24, 2007.
  60.   ^ National Coalition for the Homeless: A Dream Denied.
  61.   ^ National Coalition for the Homeless: A Dream Denied.
  62.   ^ St. Martin, Greg, "Night watch: Police removing overnight loiterers on Common", Boston Metro
        newspaper, Wednesday, August 29, 2007.
  63.   ^ National Coalition for the Homeless: A Dream Denied.
  64.   ^ Lewan, Todd, "Unprovoked Beatings of Homeless Soaring", Associated Press, April 8, 2007.
  65.   ^ National Coalition for the Homeless, Hate, "Violence, and Death on Main Street USA: A report
        on Hate Crimes and Violence Against People Experiencing Homelessness, 2006", February 2007.
  66.   ^ L.A. Times: Justices Hand L.A.'s Homeless a Victory.
  67.   ^ National Coalition for the Homeless: Hate, Violence, and Death on Main Street USA.
  68.   ^ National Coalition for the Homeless: A Dream Denied.
  69.   ^ "Occupational Exposure to Tuberculosis" - OSHA notice, 1997.

[edit] Bibliography
       Barry, Ellen, "A Refugee's Triumph Over Desolation", Boston Globe, December
        28, 2003.
       Baumohl, Jim [21], (editor), "Homelessness in America", Oryx Press, Phoenix,
       Booth, Brenda M., Sullivan, J. Greer, Koegel, Paul, Burnam, M. Audrey,
        "Vulnerability Factors for Homelessness Associated with Substance Dependence
        in a Community Sample of Homeless Adults", RAND Research Report.
        Originally published in: American Journal of Drug and Alcohol Abuse, v. 28, no.
        3, 2002, pp. 429-452.
       Burke, Kerry, Fox, Alison, Martinez, Jose, "Hobo Madness hits Mad. Ave.:
        Bizman Sues Homeless for $", New York Daily News, January 18, 2007.
       Center for Social Policy, University of Massachusetts, Boston, "Hard Numbers,
        Hard Times: Homeless Individuals in Massachusetts Emergency Shelters 1999-
        2003", July 2004.
   Coalition for the Homeless (New York), "A History of Modern Homelessness in
    New York City". [22]
   Crimaldi, Laura, "Cardinal spends time with homeless", Boston Herald,
    December 26, 2006.
   Crimaldi, Laura, "Homeless Advocates Urge no Diversion of Shelter Funds",
    Boston Herald, Wednesday, February 14, 2007.
   CSPTech, University of Massachusetts, Boston, "Characteristics of Homeless
    Families Accessing Massachusetts Emergency Shelters 1999-2001", April 2003.
   Culhane, Dennis [23], "Responding to Homelessness: Policies and Politics",
    2001. [24]
   deMause, Neil, "Out of the Shelter, Into the Fire: New city program for homeless:
    Keep your job or keep your apartment", The Village Voice, New York, June 20,
    2006. [25]
   DePastino, Todd, "Citizen Hobo: How a Century of Homelessness Shaped
    America", 2003. ISBN 0-226-14378-3
   Gatto, Nora, "Vincent", Niagara University, Eagle Alumni Magazine, Fall 2006,
   Institute for Governmental Studies, Berkeley, "Urban Homelessness & Public
    Policy Solutions: A One-Day Conference", January 22, 2001[26]
   Kahn, Ric, "Buried in obscurity: Found dead on Causeway Street in June, his
    body awaits a nameless final rest", Boston Globe, December 17, 2006. A story
    about a Beacon Hill church pausing to remember the recently departed homeless.
   Kusmer, Kenneth L. [27], "Down and Out, On the Road: The Homeless in
    American History", Oxford University Press, 2003. ISBN 0-19-504778-8
   Massachusetts Coalition for the Homeless, "Down & Out Resource Manual",
    2005. [28]
   Massachusetts, Commonwealth of, "Housing the Homeless: a more effective
    approach", Governor's Executive Commission for Homeless Services
    Coordination, November 2003.
   Morton, Margaret, "The Tunnel: The Underground Homeless Of New York City",
    Yale University Press, 1995. ISBN 0-300-06559-0
   Radin, Charles A., "On the street, a quiet outreach of kindness: Little Brothers lift
    the less fortunate", Boston Globe, December 18, 2006.
   Riis, Jacob, "How the Other Half Lives", 1890. [29]
   Rossi, Peter H., "Down and Out in America: The Origins of Homelessness",
    University Of Chicago Press, 1991.
   Schutt, Russell K., Ph.D., Professor, University of Massachusetts Boston.
        o Schutt, Russell K., et al., "Boston's Homeless, 1986-87: Change and
            Continuity", 1987.
        o Schutt, Russell K., Working with the Homeless: the Backgrounds,
            Activities and Beliefs of Shelter Staff, 1988.
        o Schutt, Russell, K., "Homeless Adults in Boston in 1990: A Two-Shelter
            Profile", 1990.
        o Schutt, Russell K., Garrett, Gerald R., "Responding to the Homeless:
            Policy and Practice", Topics in Social Psychiatry, 1992. ISBN 0-306-
           o   Schutt, Russell K., Byrne, Francine, et al., "City of Boston Homeless
               Services: Employment & Training for Homeless Persons", 1995.
           o Schutt, Russell K., Feldman, James, et al., "Homeless Persons’ Residential
               Preferences and Needs: A Pilot Survey of Persons with Severe Mental
               Illness in Boston Mental Health and Generic Shelters", 2004.
      Sommer, Heidi, "Homelessness in Urban America: a Review of the Literature",
       2001. [30]
      St. Mungo's organisation (UK), "A Brief History of Homelessness". [31]
      Vissing, Yvonne [32], "Out of Sight, Out of Mind: Homeless Children and
       Families in Small-Town America", 1996.
      Vissing, Yvonne, "The $ubtle War Against Children", Fellowship, March/April
       2003. [33]
      Vladeck, Bruce, R., and the Committee on Health Care for Homeless People,
       Institute of Medicine, "Homelessness, Health, and Human needs", National
       Academies Press, 1988. [34]
      Toth, Jennifer, "The Mole People: Life in the Tunnels Beneath New York City",
       1993. ISBN 1-55652-190-1
      United States Conference of Mayors, "Hunger and Homelessness Survery",
       December 2005. [35] [36]
      University of Vermont, "It starts With a Bed: UVM alums Richard Weintraub &
       Lyndia Downie lead fight to break cycle of homelessness in Boston, Vermont
       Quarterly, Fall 2002.


Published by the National Coalition for the Homeless, February 1999

Many people call or write the National Coalition for the Homeless to ask about the
number of homeless people in the United States. There is no easy answer to this question,
and in fact, the question itself is misleading. In most cases, homelessness is a temporary
circumstance -- not a permanent condition. A more appropriate measure of the magnitude
of homelessness is therefore the number of people who experience homelessness over
time, not the number of "homeless people."

Studies of homelessness are complicated by problems of definitions and methodology.
This fact sheet describes definitions of homelessness, methodologies for counting
homeless people, recent estimates of homelessness, and estimates of the increase in
homelessness over the past two decades. Additional resources for further study are also

As a result of methodological and financial constraints, most studies are limited to
counting people who are literally homeless -- that is, in shelters or on the streets. While
this approach may yield useful information about the number of people who use services
such as shelters and soup kitchens, or who are easy to locate on the street, it can result in
underestimates of homelessness. Many people who lack a stable, permanent residence
have few shelter options because shelters are filled to capacity or are unavailable. A
recent study of 30 U.S. cities found that in 1998, 26% of all requests for emergency
shelter went unmet due to lack of resources (U.S. Conference of Mayors, 1998). In
addition, a review of homelessness in 50 cities found that in virtually every city, the city's
official estimated number of homeless people greatly exceeded the number of emergency
shelter and transitional housing spaces (National Law Center on Homelessness and
Poverty, 1999). Moreover, there are few or no shelters in rural areas of the United States,
despite significant levels of homelessness (Aron and Fitchen, 1996). As a result of these
and other factors, many people who lack permanent housing are forced to live with
relatives and friends in crowded, temporary arrangements. People living in unstable
housing arrangements who lack a permanent place to stay are experiencing a kind of
homelessness, but because they are not "literally homeless," they will not be counted.


Researchers use different methods to measure homelessness. One method attempts to
count all the people who are literally homeless on a given day or during a given week
(point-in-time counts). A second method of counting homeless people examines the
number of people who are homeless over a given period of time (period prevalence
Choosing between point-in-time counts and period-prevalence counts has significant
implications for understanding the magnitude and dynamics of homelessness. The high
turnover in the homeless population documented by recent studies (see below) suggests
that many more people experience homelessness than previously thought, and that most
of these people do not remain homeless. Because point-in-time studies give just a
"snapshot" picture of homelessness, they only count those who are homeless at a
particular time. Over time, however, some people will find housing and escape
homelessness while new people will lose housing and become homeless. Systemic social
and economic factors (prolonged unemployment or sudden loss of a job, lack of
affordable housing, domestic violence, etc.) are frequently responsible for these episodes
of homelessness. Point-in-time studies do not accurately identify these intermittently
homeless people, and therefore tend to overestimate the proportion of people who are
chronically homeless -- particularly those who suffer from severe mental illness and/or
addiction disorders and who therefore have a much harder time escaping homelessness
and finding permanent housing. For these reasons, point-in-time counts are often
criticized as misrepresenting the magnitude and nature of homelessness.
There is another important methodological issue that should be considered. Regardless of
the time period over which the study was conducted, many people will not be counted
because they are not in places researchers can easily find. This group of people, often
referred to as "the unsheltered" or "hidden" homeless, frequently stay in automobiles,
camp grounds, or other places that researchers cannot effectively search. For instance, a
national study of formerly homeless people found that the most common places people
who had been literally homeless stayed were vehicles (59.2%) and makeshift housing,
such as tents, boxes, caves, or boxcars (24.6%) (Link et al., 1995). This suggests that
homeless counts may miss significant numbers of people who are literally homeless, as
well as those living in doubled-up situations.


There are at least four widely used national estimates of homelessness. Many are dated,
or based on dated information. For all of the reasons discussed above, none of these
estimates represents "how many people are homeless."
500,000 - 600,000 (1988)
The most widely cited example of a point-in-time estimate is the approximately 500,000-
600,000 homeless people found in shelters, eating at soup kitchens, or congregating on
the street during one week in 1988 (Burt and Cohen, 1989).
700,000+/night; 2 million/year (1999)
The 500,000-600,000 estimate is sometimes updated by using a projected rate of increase
of 5% a year to produce an estimate of over 700,000 people homeless on any given night,
and up to 2 million people who experience homelessness during one year (National Law
Center on Homelessness and Poverty, 1999).
Seven million (1985-1990)
In 1990, a national telephone survey identified formerly homeless people and produced
life-time and five-year prevalence estimates of homelessness. Seven percent of the
respondents reported that they had been literally homeless at some point in their lives,
and three percent reported being homeless at some point between 1985-1990 (Link et
al.,1994). The Clinton Administration's Priority Home! The Federal Plan to Break the
Cycle of Homelessness uses this data, corrected to include children, to estimate that
between 4.95 million to 9.32 million people (with a mid-point of 7 million) experienced
homelessness in the latter half of the 1980s.
A second study was undertaken in 1994 to refine the analysis with more explicit
definitions and detailed information. This study found that 6.5% (12 million adults
nationwide) of the respondents had been literally homeless at some point in their lives,
and that 3.6% (6.6 million adults nationwide) of the respondents had experienced
homelessness (literal or doubled up) between 1989-1994 (Link et al., 1995). Thus, it
appears that 12 million of the adult residents of the U.S. have been literally homeless at
some point in their lives.
Three percent (1994)
Dennis Culhane's study of turnover rates in shelters in New York City and Philadelphia is
another example of a period prevalence count. This study revealed that 3% of
Philadelphia's population used the public shelter system between 1990 and 1992, and that
in New York, 3% of the population received shelter between 1988-1992 (Culhane et al.,
1994). The Culhane study also found that in New York City, a single shelter bed
accomodates four different people in the course of a year; in Philadelphia, each bed
accomodates six different persons per year. Because this study did not include persons in
privately funded shelters or on the streets, the findings underestimate homelessness in
both cities.
A study by Martha Burt compared these rates with data from seven other jurisdictions
(Burt, 1994). The comparison showed that the New York City and Philadelphia rates fall
well within the range of data from other regions of the country.


One limited measure of the growth in homelessness is the increase in the number of
shelter beds over time. A 1991 study examined homelessness "rates" (the number of
shelter beds in a city divided by the city's population) in 182 U.S. cities with populations
over 100,000. The study found that homelessness rates tripled between 1981 and 1989 for
the 182 cities as a group (Burt, 1997).
A 1997 review of research conducted over the past decade (1987-1997) in 11
communities and 4 states found that shelter capacity more than doubled in nine
communities and three states during that time period (National Coalition for the
Homeless, 1997). In two communities and two states, shelter capacity tripled over the
These numbers are useful for measuring the growth in demand for shelter beds (and the
resources made available to respond to that growth) over time. They indicate a dramatic
increase in homelessness in the United States over the past two decades.


By its very nature, homelessness is impossible to measure with 100% accuracy. More
important than knowing the precise number of people who experience homelessness is
our progress in ending it. Recent studies suggest that the United States generates
homelessness at a much higher rate than previously thought. Our task in ending
homelessness is thus more important now than ever.


Aron, Laudan Y. and Janet M. Fitchen. "Rural Homelessness: A Synopsis," in
Homelessness in America, Oryx Press, 1996. Available for $43.50 from the National
Coalition for the Homeless, 1012 14th Street, NW, Suite 600, Washington, DC 20005;
Burt, Martha and Barbara Cohen. America's Homeless: Numbers, Characteristics, and
Programs that Serve Them, 1989. Available for $9.75 from The Urban Institute, 2100 M
St. NW, Washington, DC 20037-1264, 202/833-7200.
Burt, Martha. "Causes of the Growth of Homelessness During the 1980s," in
Understanding Homelessness: New Policy and Research Perspectives, Fannie Mae
Foundation, 1991, 1997. Available, free, from the Fannie Mae Foundation, 4000
Wisconsin Avenue, NW, North Tower, Suite One, Washington, DC 20016-2804; 202-
274-8074 or email:
Burt, Martha. Developing the Estimate of 500,000-600,000 Homeless People in 1987,
1991. Available, free, from The Urban Institute, 2100 M St. NW, Washington, DC
20037-1264, 202/833-7200.
Burt, Martha. Practical Methods for Counting Homeless People: A Manual for States and
Local Jurisdictions, Second Edition, 1996. Available for $13.50 from The Urban
Institute, Publications Sales Office, P.O. Box 7273, Department C, Washington, DC
20044; 202/857-8687.
Culhane, Dennis et al. "Public Shelter Admission Rates in Philadelphia and New York
City: Implications of Turnover for Sheltered Population Counts," in Housing Policy
Debate, 5(1994)2: 107-140. Available, free, from the Fannie Mae Office of Housing
Research, 3900 Wisconsin Ave. NW, Washington, DC 20016; 202/752-7761.
Interagency Council on the Homeless, U.S. Department of Housing and Urban
Development. Priority: Home! The Federal Plan to Break the Cycle of Homelessness,
1994. Available, free, from Community Connections, P.O. Box 7189, Gaithersburg, MD
20898-7189; 800/998-9999.
Link, Bruce et al. "Life-time and Five-Year Prevalence of Homelessness in the United
States" in American Journal of Public Health, (December 1994). Available from Dr.
Bruce Link, Columbia University, 100 Haven Ave., Apt. 31-D, New York, NY 10032-
2626; 212/0631.
Link, Bruce et al. "Life-time and Five-Year Prevalence of Homelessness in the United
States: New Evidence on an Old Debate," in American Journal of Orthopsychiatry, 65
(July 1995) 3: 347-354. Dr. Bruce Link, Columbia University, 100 Haven Ave., Apt. 31-
D, New York, NY 10032-2626; 212/0631.
National Coalition for the Homeless. Homelessness in America: Unabated and
Increasing, 1997. Available for $6.25 from the National Coalition for the Homeless, 1012
14th Street, NW, Suite 600, Washington, DC 20005; 202/737-6444.
National Law Center on Homelessness and Poverty. Out of Sight - Out of Mind? A
Report on Anti-Homeless Laws, Litigation, and Alternatives in 50 United States Cities,
1999. Available for $28 from the National Law Center on Homelessness and Poverty,
918 F Street, NW, Suite 412, Washington, DC 20004-1406; 202/638-2535.
U.S. Conference of Mayors. A Status Report on Hunger and Homelessness in America's
Cities: 1998. Available for $15.00 from the U.S. Conference of Mayors, 1620 Eye St.,
NW, 4th Floor, Washington, DC, 20006-4005, 202/293-7330.
Wright, James D. Evaluation Review (v.16, n.2), 1992. Available for $17.00 from Sage
Publications, 2455 Teller Rd., Thousand Oaks, CA 91320; 805/499-0721.
Let’s take a look at the UNITED STATES DEBT CRISIS.



December 2, 2004

Washington (Associated Press) – The economy is gaining momentum, bolstered by home
building, shipping and even the country’s beleaguered manufacturing sector, the Federal
Reserve said Wednesday in a newly upbeat assessment.

                      BANKRUPTCY 1995

                         HOW WE GOT INTO THIS MESS

       THEY are killing our country.

       Who are THEY?

       You know their names, and you know –or at least know of – one or more of the

guilty. There are, to be precise, 536 of them, and they have hired about 20,000 bright and

energetic people to act as their accomplices and assistants. They pay themselves and

their helpers very well, by the way, and why not? It’s your money they are living on –

that and the checks they bounce at the House bank and the loans they don’t repay at the

White House Credit Union. What could they possibly know of fiscal responsibility?

       At the head of the list of the people who have been killing our country is the

former President of the United States, George Bush, as well as the five presidents who
preceded him. Also on the list are those who’ve occupied the positions of Senate

Majority Leader and Speaker of the House. These are the ringleaders.

       We elect them and the 434 other members of the U.S. House of Representatives

and 99 other members of the U.S. Senate. With them come the thousands of people we

don’t elect – their paid congressional and White House staffs.

       Is it harsh to accuse our leaders and our honorable lawmakers of killing our

country? You won’t think so when you learn how they’re destroying your chance of

getting a better job or even keeping the one that you have.

       You won’t think I’m being harsh when you hear how you and your children—let

alone your grandchildren—are going to fare in a second-or third rate country that will be

largely owned and controlled by politicians and corporations from cities such as Berlin,

Riyadh, and Tokyo. THEIR first interest will not be YOUR well-being.

       And that company pension that you were planning on collecting to augment your

Social Security benefits? Forget it, and forget them. When the country goes, they—and

your insurance, bank accounts, and any other money you’ve managed to save—go with

it. By 1997, the dollar will be worthless, according to former U.S. Senator Warren

Rudman, the New Hampshire Republican who did not seek re-election to the U.S. Senate

in 1992 because of his frustration over its unwillingness to address our fiscal crisis. The

fact is, you’re going to be on your own in 21st Century.

       Why? Because our other so-called “LEADERS” in Washington—including your

representative and your senators—have been bleeding this country to death, and not

slowly. In the eighteen years since 1975, they have sucked the lifeblood out of the nation

and put the country in hock for cash to cover up their unwillingness to tell us the truth. In
the process, they are doing to us what George III, Adolf Hitler, Emperor Hirohito, and

Nikita Khurshchev tried to do but failed: They are destroying this country and the dream

that has sustained the American spirit for more than two hundred years.

       WHY are they killing our country? Because we let them, you and I We’ve not

only let them, we’ve encouraged them, because we wanted to keep hearing the lies they

told us. Every interest group wanted to know – and still does – that its needs were going

to be met. “NO PROBLEM,” the politicians have said, and that’s what we wanted to

hear. “Trust us,” they said. We did, and we kept sending them back to Washington.

       HOW are they killing our country?

       That’s what I’m going to explain in the rest of this book, but in a sentence or two,

they’re doing it by running up our tab – yours, mine, and ours – beyond any amount that

we will ever be able to repay or control. If present trends continue, the federal

government’s accumulated debt will have reached approximately $6.56 trillion by 1995

and $13 trillion by the year 2000.

       That 1995 figure is roughly nine times the amount the government will collect in

personal and corporate income taxes in that year. It’s the equivalent of your piling up

debts equal to nine times your annual income. It’s being in hock for $450,000 on a salary

of $50,000 a year. Are you broke at that point? Technically, no, but you sure have a

serious problem, and so do your creditors, since you won’t be able to make your


       By 1995, the United States won’t be able to afford EVEN THE ANNUAL

INTEREST PAYMENT on this debt. If interest rates start to head up (as they

undoubtedly will), the interest expense alone on the national debt could climb to a
sickening $619 billion by 1995. Six hundred nineteen billion dollars will absorb almost

all of the total personal and corporate income tax receipts that the government is

projected to collect that year. To be exact, it will absorb 85 percent of these revenues.

       Imagine that between your mortgage and your credit cards, you’d run up so much

debt that the monthly interest payments alone were 85 percent of what you brought home

in your paycheck. You’d have practically nothing left to buy groceries, gas for the car,

new shoes for the kids, or anything else. Forget about paying off the debt itself.

There’s not chance of that. All you can worry about is the interest payment, and even

that’s almost more than you can handle. That’s the situation the United States is in –


       In the movies, when borrowers disappoint the loan sharks, the mob sends goons to

break their legs…We don’t have much time to SAVE OURSELVES. Save

OURSELVES, I said, not ask someone to save us. No one will. Certainly not the

lobbyists for foreign governments and foreign corporations who range free in the power

corridors of Washington. They’re here to help us take ourselves down. We, THE

SILENT MAJORITY, who have let ourselves be shoved around by private-interest

groups for years and years, will have to do what’s needed. You don’t have to be a rocket

scientist to figure out how they are managing to kill America – and not gradually,

incidentally, but by taking increasingly larger bites out of our collective hide. All it takes

is a little patience and the ability to hold your temper:

1969 - 1974
In all but one year that Nixon was in office, the federal government ran a budget deficit,
but these deficits were smaller at the end of the presidency than at the beginning. The
government overspent its revenues by $23.4 billion in fiscal 1972, and by the time he
helicoptered off the White House lawn for the last time in 1974, Nixon had cut the deficit
amount to $6.1 billion – a help if not a solution to the borrowing problem that now, more
than two decades later, is going to paralyze us.


Maybe Richard Nixon still had some respect for at least the idea of a balanced budget,
but his unelected successor, Gerald Ford, certainly didn’t. Take a look at the graph
above. It shows that Ford stumbled into the trap that had been set during the Johnson
administration. Perhaps it was his years in Congress that insulated him from a sound
fiscal approach. In 1973, the year before Ford stepped into the Oval Office, the country
was slam-dunked by a recession. That, naturally, had the effect of throwing more people
automatically onto the federal government’s growing entitlement rolls and increasing the
costs of those programs.

Ford decided he wanted to use government spending to move the economy out of
recession, an idea that had gained currency during the Kennedy administration and
originated with the teachings of John Maynard Keynes. JFK had embraced the notion
that governments could boost their economies out of recession by deliberately
overspending. If the government spent more than it collected in taxes, it would, in effect,
create money. The extra cash would get in the hands of consumers and businesses and
jump-start the economy. The idea sounded good to Ford, so in 1974 he asked for and got
a partial tax rebate from Congress; the following year he got a tax cut. Cutting taxes
while spending increased led, of course, to higher deficits.


No question, we were a lot worse off four years AFTER Jimmy Carter took office than
we were when he was elected. On that score, Ronald Reagan was right. Poor one-term
Carter; he had both inflation and unemployment to contend with – it was a legacy of the
Democrat Lyndon Johnson, but Republicans Nixon and Ford also contributed to Carter’s

When Johnson accelerated federal deficit spending for the Vietnam War and for Great
Society programs, the economy was already in high gear. The additional government
spending had a result that should have been predictable: It kicked off higher inflation.
When you run a deficit while the economy is booming and unemployment is low, that’s
what you usually get, and it doesn’t take a Ph.D. in economics to figure out why.
Government spending injects money into an economy without adding any additional
goods to spend the money on. So what do consumers do? They tend to bid up the price
of existing goods to spend money on. So what do consumers do? They tend to bid up the
price of existing goods. It follows a logical rule of human behavior: The more money
you have, the more you’re willing to pay for what you want.

Nixon and Ford had both tried some pretty foolish measures to wring inflation out of the
economy. Nixon imposed wage and price controls, which no one except he and some of
his economic advisors thought would work. They didn’t. Ford had his WIN program –
Whip Inflation Now. Remember that? But asking Americans to wear buttons with cute
slogans didn’t work, either. Neither Nixon nor Ford had the political courage to swallow
the bitter pill that would have worked: reducing government spending and creating a
balanced budget. To do that, they would have had to cut entitlement programs, make big
reductions in defense, or make cuts in other areas of spending. They wouldn’t do any of
these things, so inflation kept galloping along.

At the same time, Carter inherited a growing unemployment problem that was no one’s
fault. The nature of the work force was changing. Women who had never worked before
were competing with men for jobs. Plus the largest wave of Baby Boomers was now in
the job market as well. The economy was expanding to accommodate these new
workers, but not fast enough. Carter didn’t know which problem – unemployment or
inflation – to tackle first. Finally, he made a decision. He chose unemployment and
attacked it with still more deficits. In effect, he opened the furnace door to increase the
draft, and the flames of inflation leapt higher. Interest rates soared to 21 percent.

Carter used an economic tool on what was really a demographic problem. He got the
result that we can say now he should have expected but not the one that he wanted.
Unemployment stayed pretty much the same until his last year in office, but the inflation
rate just got higher. In the process, Carter, as you can see from the graph on page 31, set
new records during his term for total annual budget deficits and for growth in the national
debt, just like the two men who would follow him in the office. During the Carter
presidency, the government overspent its revenues by a total of $227 billion. That was
more than all, the deficits piled up during World War II.

And what happened to those entitlement programs? With inflation running in the double
digits, the people who were collecting the benefits saw their real value go down year by
year. It was a matter of simple math. If the annual inflation rate stood at, say, 10 percent,
a $500-a-month benefit would have only $450 in purchasing power a year later.
Congress, always eager to spend money that will make constituents happy, decided to
index some of these benefits, including Social Security, to the inflation rate. That move
not only made our problems worse, but now threatens our future.

Indexing means that the benefit levels go up automatically to compensate recipients for
the effects of inflation. That was nice for the people who collected Social Security and
other government checks, but it exacerbated the deficit problems that are associated with
entitlements. Now, not only were entitlement programs considered untouchable by a
president or a Congress that couldn’t take the political heat that would come from telling
some people “NO,” they were actually growing even more than before.

Each time inflation ticked up a point, so did the entitlement benefits. By the end of the
Carter reign, 54.6 percent of the government’s annual budget for everything except
interest on the debt was consumed by these uncontrollable programs. Even if the
government had wanted to reduce spending – which, of course, it didn’t—less and less of
the budget was available for cutting.

The real tragedy of the Carter years? If at the start of his administration Carter had just
capped the federal government’s expenditures, a rising revenue stream would have
enabled him to balance the budget in two years. As we know, he didn’t, and in his single
term in office, Carter’s deficit spending brought the federal debt up to $909 billion.


Ronald Reagan was explicit and emphatic, both as a candidate and then as president, that
he would deliver a balanced federal budget. That was a central objective of his economic
policy. And a lot of us believed him. Why not? He certainly sounded convincing. In
the first minute of his first televised address to the nation after taking office in January
1981, he pointed to that year’s “deficit of nearly 80 billion” as evidence that “the federal
budget is out of control.” Two weeks later, in his first address to Congress, he echoed the
same warning in a different way. “Can we, who man the ship out of state, deny that it is
somewhat out of control?” he asked. “Our national debt is approaching $1 trillion.” At
last, I thought, here’s someone who will apply the brakes to our runaway debt.

But by the time Reagan’s successor took office in January 1989, it was difficult to
remember that these numbers had aroused a sense of alarm eight years previously. The
$79 billion budget deficit that Reagan had inherited from Jimmy Carter in 1981 was last
expressed in double digits. Further, over the next seven years, on Reagan’s watch, the
national debt nearly tripled, rising from $909 billion to an astonishing $2.6 trillion by the
time he left office.

Why did it happen? The Reagan administration, which included George Bush,
apparently wanted to achieve two goals: It wanted to balance the budget and start an
arms race that would bankrupt the Soviet Union before the turn of the century. How
could Reagan manage both? As it turned out, he couldn’t, and the attempt will end up
bankrupting us as well. Does this remind you of the Johnson era? Reagan, like Johnson,
tried to supply both guns and butter. To do so, he, or his advisers, tried to hoodwink us
by relying on an old chestnut and some new magic.

The old chestnut was government waste, fraud, and abuse. If his administration could
identify all the many places where money was being misspent and fix them, Reagan
would have part of what he needed to fund his military buildup while simultaneously
reducing the debt. The other part, the new magic, would come from his so-called supply-

The Reagan tax cuts, which were enacted when he took office in 1981 and again in 1986,
were a success in the sense that they did what he said they would. THEY ACTUALLY
positive happened for the economy during Reagan’s administration. The chairman of the
Federal Reserve, PAUL VOLCKER, who had also served under Carter, finally broke the
back of inflation by contracting the money supply. The other part of the Reagan strategy,
though – finding and eliminating waste, fraud, and abuse –was by any measure a dismal
and absolute failure.

As a result of the Reagan tax cuts and the economic growth that followed, the
government’s revenues grew by 76 percent between 1980 and 1988, but government
spending grew by 80 percent. During this time, for every additional tax dollar the
government took in, it spent $1.21. Most of the revenue growth, incidentally, came from
an increase in the Social Security tax mandated in 1983. From 1980 to 1988, Social
Security tax revenues climbed by 112 percent.

In short, Reagan’s overall strategy failed to generate the additional revenue that he
wanted to spend on the arms race. So what did he do? He spent it anyway. DEFENSE
INCREASE OF 116 PERCENT. Ronald Reagan’s annual deficits were larger than those
of any other president before him, and the $2.6 trillion debt he left the country when he
yielded the Oval Office to his protégé, George Bush, eclipsed any debt figures this nation
or any other had ever seen.

Ronald Reagan, whatever his other accomplishments in office, utterly failed to prod the
Congress or the country to come to grips with what, by the end of his presidency, should
have been the first item on the list of national priorities; eliminating the annual federal
deficit. He and the Congress had done little to reverse the un-bridled growth of federal
entitlement programs, which in 1988 all by themselves ate up 54 percent of every dollar
the government collected in revenue. He made a travesty of his campaign promises—as
do all presidential and most congressional candidates.

Increased defense spending, whatever its global strategic merits, made the problem of the
deficit, which should have been our first concern, worse. By how much? In the last year
of the Reagan administration, DEFENSE SPENDING CHEEWED UP 32 PERCENT OF
AVAILABLE REVENUES. And we still haven’t mentioned all other government

And how does the government get the rest of the money it needs? Right again. The
government borrows it. Partially as a result of these failed fiscal policies and the LARGE

So that’s the legacy that we inherited from the Gipper: AN INABILITY TO OPERATE
country to find itself in, but especially one that thinks of itself—inaccurately now, to be
sure—as the richest and most powerful on earth.

As any family or individual who overspends learns, sooner or later the bills come due.
Ronald Reagan ran the country’s credit cards almost up to their limits. George Bush
followed suit.


In four years in office, George Bush set new records for outspending government
revenues, as the accompanying graph shows. In these four years, Bush’s deficits came to
nearly 85 percent of the deficits Reagan took a full eight years to rack up. For now, at
least, Bush holds the title of all-time champion overspender.

Let’s try to be charitable toward Bush for a moment. In one sense, he can point the finger
of blame for his overspending at presidents and Congresses going all the way back to
Lyndon Johnson. It’s certainly true that he came into office facing a prodigious
challenge. By the end of the Reagan years, the portion of the federal budget that could be
easily controlled—that is, reduced—by the President or the Congress had become
pitiably small. By the end of Bush’s presidency, interest and entitlement spending had
grown, leaving nearly 27 percent of the budget that is now considered controllable.
Interest alone totaled 61 percent of all personal income taxes in 1992—that means that
just paying our creditors took the equivalent of 61 cents of every dollar the federal
government withheld from your paycheck that year.



Congress is no less and probably more guilty in the coming death of the United States

than the string of presidents we’ve had for the last thirty years. You’ve recently seen that

most of our representatives can’t manage their own finances and checkbooks, their own

post office, and their congressional restaurant tabs. How do we expect them and their

staffs to manage the nation’s finances? Most of them are lawyers or professional

politicians who never had to make a payroll or run any organization that had to make a

profit. When you look back over the past 50 years, you see that elected representatives

and their staffs have also become captive to the most well-financed and effective

lobbying groups that ever brought influence to bear any legislative body anywhere at any

time. In that period, which began with the onset of the Vietnam war, splinter groups and

special-interest groups learned how to use their power to divide and conquer in

Washington. Members of Congress learned that to get re-elected, they had to provide

something for each group, as well as jobs and aid for their constituencies.

        It wasn’t only domestic-interest groups that were hiring professional interest

peddlers. Foreign countries and foreign corporations – from Japan, Korea, Mexico, and a

myriad of others—have spent millions of dollars to hire ex-government officials at huge

salaries to represent their own selfish interests.

        The growth rate of the federal budget deficit will accelerate. From more than

$400 billion in 1993, it will, if present trends continue, balloon to $730 billion, according

to GRACE COMMISSION projections. It will climb further in 1995, reaching $850

billion. If this rapid deficit growth continues, interest payments are projected to exceed

the amount of money the government collects in personal income taxes by 1995.

TAXES BY 1995. By 1995, interest on the debt alone will reach 105 PERCENT OF


       Don’t be fooled, incidentally, when our leaders play around with the numbers.

They may claim, for example, that interest on our debt will come to only 47 percent of

“total revenues” in 1995 – as if that weren’t bad enough. But included in their definition

of total revenues are Social Security receipts, as well as corporate and personal income

taxes. By 1995, even if American politicians haven’t acknowledged it yet, the rest of the

world will have figured out that the United States is going to default on its debt. That’s

when and why our country and lives will come apart.

       President Clinton’s first “deficit reduction” proposal, issued in April 1993,

marked the sixth time in the past eleven years that Washington politicians have

announced a new plan, passed a new law, or reached a new agreement that they promised

would bring spending under control in order to reduce and eventually eliminate budget

deficits. As we have seen, our politicians have been wrong.

       If there were elected officials in Washington who both knew how to attack the

government’s propensity to overspend and WANTED to attack it, they were a pitiful few,

and they had their hands tied. Most elected officials realize, in fact, that their re-election

to office depends on their perpetuating a system that encourages waste and deficit

spending. We, the American people, are to blame for this sorry situation. The sad truth

is that most of us don’t even realize what has been done to our country ins so short a

time. Consequently, we have sat back as a silent majority and let the special-and foreign-

interest lobby groups destroy our country.

Consequently, the Social Security Trust fund, where the money was supposed to be

saved, has for some years been running a large surplus. In other words, more money is

paid into the trust fund every year than is needed to pay current Social Security

recipients. By the time the Baby Boomers were ready to retire beginning in 2010, the

fund was supposed to have more than $1 trillion in assets. But instead of leaving the

money to accumulate in the trust fund, as an individual saves for a retirement account and

corporations are required to do in their pension funds, the government invests more

money in its own securities – in effect, lending to the surplus itself.

       Congress replaces the real dollars that people pay into the Social Security trust

fund with specially created, non-marketable Treasury bonds. These are the Federal

Government’s IOU’s to itself. Then they spend the actual money they have received.

       By now, 1993, the federal government has borrowed more than $1 trillion from

Social Security and the other trust funds. Worse, though, the government doesn’t even

acknowledge that it is borrowing. In fact, it counts the surplus as revenue, thereby

making the real deficit look smaller than it actually is. When Baby Boomers who are

working today begin to retire, all they will find in the Social Security savings account is

more than $1 trillion of the government’s paper, which will undoubtedly have become

worthless long before that time.

       What the budget masters in Congress and the executive branch do to Social

Security, they also do to other federal trust funds – military, postal workers, railroad, and

civil service retirement; Medicare surplus; and highways and airports trust funds. They
borrow from these funds, and replace the money with IOUs. What’s more, they count the

money coming in as revenue, but they ignore the future liabilities on those funds – which

makes the current books look better but guarantees bigger problems further out in time.

       It also distorts the true picture of the revenue stream.



                            A REPORT TO THE PRESIDENT

                                        VOLUME I


                         ITS MEETING ON JANUARY 15, 1984

                                          [page ii]

                                        [start page 1]

       January 12, 1984

The Honorable Ronald Reagan
President of the United States
The White House
Washington, D.C.

Dear Mr. President,

Following your directive to identify and suggest remedies for waste and abuse in the
Federal Government, the President's Private Sector Survey (PPSS) offers
recommendations which would save:

       $424 billion in three years, rising to
       $1.9 trillion per year by the year 2000.

These proposals would transform the Federal debt situation as follows:

                      Federal Debt                     Annual Interest on Federal Debt

                     ( $ Trillions )                              ( $ billions )

            Without PPSS          With PPSS           Without PPSS                 With PPSS

1990                    $ 3.2             $ 2.0                  $ 252.3                 $ 89.2

1995                      6.2               2.2                    540.9                  62.3

2000                     13.0               2.5                  1,520.7                  75.1

 You asked the American people to help you get the Government "off their backs." If the
American people realized how rapidly Federal Government spending is likely to grow
under existing legislated programs, I am convinced they would compel their elected
representatives to "get the Government off their backs." In our survey to search out ways
to cut costs in the Government, great emphasis was placed on the spending outlook,
which is as follows:

[See the scanned sheet for the graph that shows outlays exceeding revenues by a $2
Trillion deficit by the year 2000.]

If fundamental changes are not made in Federal spending, as compared with the fiscal
1983 deficit of $195 billion, a deficit of over ten times that amount, $2 trillion, is
projected for the year 2000, only 17 years from now. In that year, the Federal debt
would be $13.0 trillion ($160,000 per current taxpayer) and the interest alone on the
debt would be $1.5 trillion per year ($18,500 per year per current taxpayer).

Mr. President, these projections are the result of a joint effort between PPSS and a
leading U.S. economic forecasting firm. They are the result of very careful study and
drove us to seek out every possible savings opportunity, "like tireless bloodhounds," as
you requested.

In the course of the search by our 36 Task Forces, chaired by 161 top executives from
around the country and staffed by over 2,000 volunteers that they provided, we came up
with 2,478 separate, distinct, and specific recommendations which are the basis for the
carefully projected savings. For practical purposes, these savings, if fully implemented,
could virtually eliminate the reported deficit by the 1990's versus an alternative deficit of
$10.2 trillion in the decade of the 1990's if no action is taken.
Equally important, the 2,478 cost-cutting, revenue-enhancing recommendations we have
made can be achieved without raising taxes, without weakening America's needed
defense build-up, and without in any way harming necessary social welfare programs.

Because we are starting from a deficit of $195 billion, every dollar we can stop spending
is a dollar that the Government does not have to borrow. With future Government
borrowing costs at 11 percent (versus 10.75 percent now and 14.5 percent when you took
office) and inflation taken at 6 percent per year over the longer run, these savings
compound quickly.

Applying these interest and inflation rates, the result is that a dollar saved today
accumulates to $32 over 12 years and $71 over 17 years. Thus, any potential saving
made, as compared to not making the saving, translates into a difference in cumulative
spending of 32 times that amount through 1995 and 71 times that amount through the end
of the century.

Therefore, $100 billion in reduced Government spending in year one equates
cumulatively to $7.1 trillion in the year 2000. And since borrowings are decreased by this
amount, so will the national debt decrease.

This is, of course, a horrendous prospect. If the American people understood the gravity
of the outlook, they would not, I believe, support representatives who might let it happen.

Mr. President, you have been so correct in resisting attempts to balance the budget by
increasing taxes. The tax load on the average American family is already at
counterproductive levels with the underground economy having now grown to an
estimated $500 billion per year, costing about $100 billion in lost Federal tax revenues
per year.

The size of the underground economy is understandable when one considers that median
family income taxes have increased from $9 in 1948 to $2,218 in 1983, or by 246 times.
This is runaway taxation at its worst.

Importantly, any meaningful increases in taxes from personal income would have to
come from lower and middle income families, as 90 percent of all personal taxable
income is generated below the taxable income level of $35,000.

Further, there isn't much more that can be extracted from high income brackets. If the
Government took 100 percent of all taxable income beyond the $75,000 tax bracket not
already taxed, it would get only $17 billion, and this confiscation, which would destroy
productive enterprise, would only be sufficient to run the Government for seven days.

Resistance to additional income taxes would be even more widespread if people were
aware that:
      One-third of all their taxes is consumed by waste and inefficiency in the Federal
       Government as we identified in our survey.
       Another one-third of all their taxes escapes collection from others as the
       underground economy blossoms in direct proportion to tax increases and places
       even more pressure on law abiding taxpayers, promoting still more underground
       economy-a vicious cycle that must be broken.
       With two-thirds of everyone's personal income taxes wasted or not collected, 100
       percent of what is collected is absorbed solely by interest on the Federal debt
       and by Federal Government contributions to transfer payments. In other
       words, all individual income tax revenues are gone before one nickel is spent
       on the services which taxpayers expect from their Government.

Our survey studied the small as well as the major items of cost savings, items of broad
national impact as well as those of a more localized nature. I believe you will be
interested in a few random examples of what we found:

      In the Northwest, the Federal Power Marketing Administration is selling
       subsidized power at one-third of market rates. If the Federal power were priced at
       market, there would be a three-year increase in revenues of $4.5 billion, which
       equates to the three-year personal income taxes of 676,000 median income
       American families who are thus subsidizing a discrete group in one part of the

      The Civil Service and Military Retirement Systems provide to participants three
       times and six times the benefits, respectively, of the best private sector plans. The
       Government's civilian and military employees retire at an earlier age, typically
       age 55 and 40, respectively, versus 63 to 64 in the private sector, with
       substantially more liberal benefit formulas than their private sector counterparts.
       In addition, the pensions of Federal retirees are fully indexed for inflation -- a
       rarity in the private sector. Modifying major Federal pensions to provide benefits
       comparable to those of the best private sector plans, slightly better in the case of
       military pensions, would result in three-year savings of $60.9 billion, equivalent
       to the three-year income taxes of 9.2 million median income families.

      A relatively small item in the overall, but representative of many, is the
       prohibition of competitive bidding on the movement of military personnel
       household goods to and from Alaska and Hawaii, despite a DOD test showing that
       competitive bidding would reduce costs by as much as 26 percent. Elimination of
       this provision would save $69.5 million in three years, equivalent to the three-year
       income taxes of 10,400 median income families.
      We found Congressional interference to be a major problem. For example,
       because Congress obstructs the closing of bases that the military wants to close,
       the three-year waste is $367 million. In total, PPSS recommends three-year
       savings of $3.1 billion by closing excess military bases, equivalent to the three-
       year income taxes of 466,000 median income families.

Mr. President, these are just a few of the absurd situations that we found throughout the
Government that add up to billions of dollars per year and where the opportunities for
savings are clearly available.

Some of the recommendations made by PPSS have been made before. Others are entirely
new. Regardless of their origins, the focus must now be on implementation. The current
economic trends are simply too serious to delay action any longer.

PPSS has submitted 36 major Task Force reports and 11 studies on special subjects such
as subsidies and retirement. In total, these reports substantiate three-year ongoing savings
of $424.4 billion, plus cash accelerations of $66 billion. These are all analyzed and
supported in great detail. Capsuled in terms of the functional problems to which they
relate, the savings are as follows:
                            PPSS Savings Recommendations

                                                      $ Billions           % of Total

Program Waste                                                $ 160.9               37.9 %

System Failures                                                151.3               35.7 %

Personnel Mismanagement                                         90.9               21.4 %

Structural Deficiencies                                         12.7                3.0 %

Other Opportunities                                                8.6              2.0 %

Total                                                        $ 424.4             100.0 %

These data confirm our findings that system failures and personnel mismanagement
together comprise well over one-half, 57.1 percent, of the total savings possibilities.
They are at the foundation of inefficiencies in the Federal Government. Program waste,
which accounts for 37.9 percent of the savings recommendations, would also be
substantially eliminated if proper systems and personnel management were in place.

The above underscores one of our most important recommendations, which is the
establishment of an Office of Federal Management in the Executive Office of the
President. This Federal Government top management office would include 0MB, GSA
and OPM and have Government-wide responsibility for establishing, modernizing, and
monitoring management systems.

If it is set up and staffed properly, it could go a long way to avoid in the future the
thousands of deficiencies and examples of waste that we have identified. We would not
feel our task complete if we just identified past deficiencies without recommendations for
a management and organizational structure that would be best suited for preventing the
errors of the past.

Additionally, the establishment of this new office would be beneficial in the
implementation process of the PPSS recommendations.

In this regard, we believe that your Cabinet Council on Management and Administration,
working in concert with the Office of Cabinet Affairs, is uniquely suited to lead a
Government-wide effort to restore sound principles of management and efficiency to the
Federal Government. While the Cabinet Council already has taken a leadership role in
this regard, we urge you to call upon it to make implementation of the PPSS
recommendations Government-wide its highest priority.
Mr. President, it was a great honor to have been asked by you to engage in this effort to
identify ways to eliminate inefficiency, waste and abuse in the Federal Government. The
project was structured and staffed to effect enduring improvement so that our children
and grandchildren would not inherit a situation that would be devastating to them and to
the values of our economic and social system. It was in this vein that we were able to
enlist the 161 top executives from private business and other organizations to chair and to
staff our 36 Task Forces at a cost to the private sector of over $75 million and at no cost
to the Government.

All the participants join with me in thanking you for the opportunity to be of service and
in looking forward to whatever additional help we may be able to provide to assure that
the greatest practical results are obtained from the work of this Commission.



J. Peter Grace


                                       [end page 7]

Forest refers to the above as the Cover Letter to the PPSS. It is a revealing summary
which Congress ignores.

Page 8 starts the Report to the President, Volume I. Continuing pagination is 8, 9, 10, I-1,
I-2, etc.

Except for bold, [page numbers in brackets] and necessary formatting for this web page,
the above is a copy of the Cover Letter from the

President's Private Sector Survey on Cost Control,

also known as PPSS and the Grace Commission Report.

The cover letter is from 600 pages of Volumes I and II in my library.

Source: The hard copy was purchased from

       U. S. Department of Commerce
       Technology Administration
       NTIS (National Technical Information Service)
       Springfield VA 22161
       (703) 605-6000

Forest Glen Durland

         [Source: <>]

                             How was CAGW founded?

Founded in 1984 by the late industrialist J. Peter Grace and syndicated columnist Jack
Anderson, CAGW is the follow-on organization to President Ronald Reagan's Private
Sector Survey on Cost Control, also known as the Grace Commission. In 1982, President
Reagan directed the Grace Commission to "work like tireless bloodhounds to root out
government inefficiency and waste of tax dollars." For two years, 161 corporate
executives and community leaders led an army of 2,000 volunteers on a waste hunt
throughout the federal government. Funded entirely by voluntary contributions of $76
million from the private sector, the search cost taxpayers nothing. The Grace Commission
made 2,478 recommendations which, if implemented, would save $424.4 billion over
three years, an average of $141.5 billion a year – all without eliminating essential
services. The 47 volumes and 21,000 pages of the Grace Commission Report constitute a
vision of an efficient, well-managed government that is accountable to taxpayers. CAGW
has worked to make that vision a reality and, in 17 years, has helped save taxpayers $687
billion through the implementation of Grace Commission findings and other


This book is a short excerpt from the book entitled:

STOP IT by Harry E. Figgie Jr., with Gerald J. Swanson

From 1995 to 2005, some new projections can be made. This year, 2005, President
George Bush Junior, announced that Social Security is going bankrupt and that
young Americans can, should and must invest into Individual Retirement Accounts
(IRA’S) and that our old Social Security System will collapse.
As layoffs continue in 2005 all over the world, HOPE BEGINS WITH THE CROSS
OF JESUS CHRIST. The result of being content with just food and clothing has
taken on an entirely different meaning in these last days of life on earth:


This book is a great tool for understanding ECONOMICS and I would highly
recommend buying this book because it will give you an accurate history for how
America Collapsed for the American worker.

If you are an American Business owner the following LAYOFFS LIST for 2005, in
just these two months should also stimulate you into proposing a new financial
system, a new plan, to save the world. But don’t worry, our new anti-Christ leader
is coming soon with this proposal and everything that we have worked ‘real hard’
for is going to give his cause the glory, the power, the fame, and the fortune.


1. Half the world — nearly three billion people — live on less than two dollars a
    day. source 1
2. The GDP (Gross Domestic Product) of the poorest 48 nations (i.e. a quarter of the
    world’s countries) is less than the wealth of the world’s three richest people
    combined. source 2
3. Nearly a billion people entered the 21st century unable to read a book or sign their
    names. source 3
4. Less than one per cent of what the world spent every year on weapons was needed
    to put every child into school by the year 2000 and yet it didn't happen. source 4
5. 51 percent of the world’s 100 hundred wealthiest bodies are corporations. source 5
6. The wealthiest nation on Earth has the widest gap between rich and poor of any
    industrialized nation. source 6
7. The poorer the country, the more likely it is that debt repayments are being
    extracted directly from people who neither contracted the loans nor received any
    of the money. source 7
8. 20% of the population in the developed nations, consume 86% of the world’s
    goods. source 8
9. The top fifth of the world’s people in the richest countries enjoy 82% of the
    expanding export trade and 68% of foreign direct investment — the bottom fifth,
    barely more than 1%. source 9
10. In 1960, the 20% of the world’s people in the richest countries had 30 times the
    income of the poorest 20% — in 1997, 74 times as much. source 10
11. An analysis of long-term trends shows the distance between the richest and
    poorest countries was about:
         o 3 to 1 in 1820
         o 11 to 1 in 1913
         o 35 to 1 in 1950
         o 44 to 1 in 1973
                              source 11
         o 72 to 1 in 1992
12. “The lives of 1.7 million children will be needlessly lost this year [2000] because
    world governments have failed to reduce poverty levels” source 12
13. The developing world now spends $13 on debt repayment for every $1 it receives
    in grants. source 13
14. A few hundred millionaires now own as much wealth as the world’s poorest 2.5
    billion people. source 14
15. “The 48 poorest countries account for less than 0.4 per cent of global exports.”
   source 15

16. “The combined wealth of the world’s 200 richest people hit $1 trillion in 1999;
    the combined incomes of the 582 million people living in the 43 least developed
    countries is $146 billion.” source 16
17. “Of all human rights failures today, those in economic and social areas affect by
    far the larger number and are the most widespread across the world’s nations and
    large numbers of people.” source 17
18. “Approximately 790 million people in the developing world are still chronically
    undernourished, almost two-thirds of whom reside in Asia and the Pacific.” source

19. According to UNICEF, 30,000 children die each day due to poverty. And they
    “die quietly in some of the poorest villages on earth, far removed from the
    scrutiny and the conscience of the world. Being meek and weak in life makes
    these dying multitudes even more invisible in death.”

   That is about 210,000 children each week, or just under 11 million children under
   five years of age, each year. source 19

20. For economic growth and almost all of the other indicators, the last 20 years [of
    the current form of globalization, from 1980 - 2000] have shown a very clear
    decline in progress as compared with the previous two decades [1960 - 1980]. For
    each indicator, countries were divided into five roughly equal groups, according
    to what level the countries had achieved by the start of the period (1960 or 1980).
    Among the findings:
        o Growth: The fall in economic growth rates was most pronounced and
            across the board for all groups or countries.
        o Life Expectancy: Progress in life expectancy was also reduced for 4 out of
            the 5 groups of countries, with the exception of the highest group (life
            expectancy 69-76 years).
        o Infant and Child Mortality: Progress in reducing infant mortality was also
            considerably slower during the period of globalization (1980-1998) than
            over the previous two decades.
        o Education and literacy: Progress in education also slowed during the
            period of globalization.
   source 20

21. Water problems affect half of humanity:
      o Some 1.1 billion people in developing countries have inadequate access to
           water, and 2.6 billion lack basic sanitation.
      o Almost two in three people lacking access to clean water survive on less
           than $2 a day, with one in three living on less than $1 a day.
      o More than 660 million people without sanitation live on less than $2 a day,
           and more than 385 million on less than $1 a day.
      o Access to piped water into the household averages about 85% for the
           wealthiest 20% of the population, compared with 25% for the poorest
      o 1.8 billion people who have access to a water source within 1 kilometre,
           but not in their house or yard, consume around 20 litres per day. In the
           United Kingdom the average person uses more than 50 litres of water a
           day flushing toilets (where average daily water usage is about 150 liters a
           day. The highest average water use in the world is in the US, at 600 liters
        o      Some 1.8 million child deaths each year as a result of diarrhoea
        o      The loss of 443 million school days each year from water-related illness.
        o      Close to half of all people in developing countries suffering at any given
               time from a health problem caused by water and sanitation deficits.
        o      Millions of women spending several hours a day collecting water.
        o      To these human costs can be added the massive economic waste
               associated with the water and sanitation deficit.… The costs associated
               with health spending, productivity losses and labour diversions … are
               greatest in some of the poorest countries. Sub-Saharan Africa loses about
               5% of GDP, or some $28.4 billion annually, a figure that exceeds total aid
               flows and debt relief to the region in 2003.
   source 21

22. The richest 50 million people in Europe and North America have the same
    income as 2.7 billion poor people. “The slice of the cake taken by 1% is the same
    size as that handed to the poorest 57%.” source 22
23. The world’s 497 billionaires in 2001 registered a combined wealth of $1.54
    trillion, well over the combined gross national products of all the nations of sub-
    Saharan Africa ($929.3 billion) or those of the oil-rich regions of the Middle East
    and North Africa ($1.34 trillion). It is also greater than the combined incomes of
    the poorest half of humanity. source 23
24. A mere 12 percent of the world’s population uses 85 percent of its water, and
    these 12 percent do not live in the Third World. source 24
25. Consider the global priorities in spending in 1998

                Global Priority              $U.S. Billions
   Cosmetics in the United States            8
   Ice cream in Europe                       11
   Perfumes in Europe and the United States 12
   Pet foods in Europe and the United States 17
   Business entertainment in Japan           35
   Cigarettes in Europe                      50
   Alcoholic drinks in Europe                105
   Narcotics drugs in the world              400
   Military spending in the world            780

26. And compare that to what was estimated as additional costs to achieve universal
    access to basic social services in all developing countries:

            Global Priority               $U.S. Billions
   Basic education for all                6
   Water and sanitation for all           9
              Global Priority          $U.S. Billions
     Reproductive health for all women 12
     Basic health and nutrition        13

  27. source 25
  28. Number of children in the world
      2.2 billion
      Number in poverty
      1 billion (every second child)
      Shelter, safe water and health
      For the 1.9 billion children from the developing world, there are:

          o      640 million without adequate shelter (1 in 3)
          o      400 million with no access to safe water (1 in 5)
          o      270 million with no access to health services (1 in 7)

     Children out of education worldwide
     121 million
     Survival for children

          o      10.6 million died in 2003 before they reached the age of 5 (same as
                 children population in France, Germany, Greece and Italy)
          o      1.4 million die each year from lack of access to safe drinking water and
                 adequate sanitation

     Health of children

          o      2.2 million children die each year because they are not immunized
          o      15 million children orphaned due to HIV/AIDS (similar to the total
                 children population in Germany or United Kingdom)
     source 26

  29. The total wealth of the top 8.3 million people around the world “rose 8.2 percent
      to $30.8 trillion in 2004, giving them control of nearly a quarter of the world’s
      financial assets.”

     In other words, about 0.13% of the world’s population controlled 25% of the
     world’s assets in 2004. source 27

Notes and Sources
1) This figure is based on purchasing power parity (PPP), which basically suggests that
prices of goods in countries tend to equate under floating exchange rates and therefore
people would be able to purchase the same quantity of goods in any country for a given
sum of money. That is, the notion that a dollar should buy the same amount in all
countries. Hence if a poor person in a poor country living on a dollar a day moved to the
U.S. with no changes to their income, they would still be living on a dollar a day. In
addition, see the following:

      Ignacio Ramonet, The politics of hunger, Le Monde diplomatique, November
      The 9th International Anti-Corruption Conference Plenary Address by James
       Wolfensohn, August 2000
      March recognizes the billions living on less than two dollars a day,, October 24, 2000
      The poverty lines: population living with less than 2 dollars and less than 1 dollar
       a day from provides two maps showing the concentration of
       people living on less than 1 and 2 dollars per day, around the world.
      Also note that these numbers, from the World Bank, have been questioned and
            o The World Bank has been criticized for almost arbitrarily coming up with
                a definition of a poverty line to mean one dollar per day (of which they
                say there are about 1.3 billion people). That figure and how it has been
                chosen has been much criticized by many, as shown by University of
                Ottawa Professor, Michel Chossudovsky in the previous link.
            o In addition, as also stated in the previous link, in the United States for
                example, the poverty threshold for a family of four has been estimated to
                be around eleven dollars per day. The one dollar a day definition then
                misses out much of humanity to understand the impacts. Even the two
                dollars per day that I have pointed out here, while affecting half of
                humanity, also misses out the numbers under three or four, or eleven
                dollars per day. These statistics are harder to find, and as I come across
                them, I will post them here!
            o As an aside, Morgan Spurlock, the Oscar nominee for his documentary
                Super Size Me where he went 30 days on a diet of burgers only to see the
                effects, produced another documentary where for 30 days he tried to live
                on the minimum wage of $5.15 per hour. At times he was earning $50 to
                $70 a day and yet the tremendous hardships he faced was incredible
                (including a ludicrous $40 for a bandage in a hospital, and some $500 for
                just being seen to).
            o More fundamental than that though, for example, is a critique from

               Columbia University, called How not to count the poor                   .
               The report describes an ill-defined poverty line, a misleading and
              inaccurate measure of purchasing power equivalence, and false precision
              as the three main errors that may lead to “a large understatement of the
              extent of global income poverty and to an incorrect inference that it has
              declined.” (Emphasis added). This allows the World Bank to insist that the
              world is indeed “on the right track” in terms of poverty reduction strategy,
              attributing this “success” to the design and implementation of “good” or
              “better policies”.
      But the statistic is not lost on some of the most prominent people in the world
          o The New York Times in one of their email updates, in their Quote of the
              Day section, for July 18, 2001 provided the following quote: “A world
              where some live in comfort and plenty, while half of the human race lives
              on less than $2 a day, is neither just, nor stable.” — President Bush
          o See also James Wolfenson, The Other Crisis, World Bank, October 1998
              who said: “Today, across the world, 1.3 billion people live on less than
              one dollar a day; 3 billion live on under two dollars a day; 1.3 billion have
              no access to clean water; 3 billion have no access to sanitation; 2 billion
              have no access to electricity.” (See also note 21 below.)
          o Koffi Anan, UN Secretary General, in a speech on the International Day
              for the Eradication of Poverty, 17 October 2000, said “Almost half the
              world’s population lives on less than two dollars a day, yet even this
              statistic fails to capture the humiliation, powerlessness and brutal hardship
              that is the daily lot of the world’s poor.”

2) Ignacio Ramonet, The politics of hunger, Le Monde Diplomatique, November 1998
3) The State of the World’s Children, 1999, UNICEF
4) State of the World, Issue 287 - Feb 1997, New Internationalist
5) See the following:

      Holding Transnationals Accountable, IPS, August 11, 1998
      Top 200: The Rise of Corporate Global Power, by Sarah Anderson and John
       Cavanagh, Institute for Policy Studies, November 2000

6) The Corporate Planet, Corporate Watch, 1997
7) Debt - The facts, Issue 312 - May 1999, New Internationalist
8) 1998 Human Development Report, United Nations Development Programme
9) 1999 Human Development Report, United Nations Development Programme
10) Ibid
11) Ibid
12) Missing the Target; The price of empty promises, Oxfam, June 2000
13) Global Development Finance, World Bank, 1999
14) Economics forever; Building sustainability into economic policy PANOS Briefing 38,
March 2000
15) Human Development Report 2000, p. 82, United Nations Development Programme
16) Ibid, p. 82
17) Ibid, p. 73
18) World Resources Institute Pilot Analysis of Global Ecosystems, February 2001, (in
the Food Feed and Fiber section). Note, that dispite the food production rate being better
than population growth rate, there is still so much hunger around the world.
19) See the following:

      Progress of Nations 2000, UNICEF, 2000;
      Robert E. Black, Saul S Morris, Jennifer Bryce, Where and why are 10 million
       children dying every year?, The Lancet, Volume 361, Number 9376, 28 June
       2003. (Note, while the article title says 10 million, their paper says 10.8 million.)
      State of the World’s Children, 2005, UNICEF (this cites the number as 10.6
       million in 2003)

Note that the statistic cited uses children as those under the age of five. If it was say 6, or
7, the numbers would be even higher.
20) The Scorecard on Globalization 1980-2000: Twenty Years of Diminished Progress,
by Mark Weisbrot, Dean Baker, Egor Kraev and Judy Chen, Center for Economic Policy
and Research, August 2001.
21) 2006 United Nations Human Development Report, pp.6, 7, 35
22) Larry Elliott, A cure worse than the disease, The Guardian, January 21, 2002
23) John Cavanagh and Sarah Anderson , World’s Billionaires Take a Hit, But Still Soar,
The Institute for Policy Studies, March 6, 2002
24) Maude Barlow, Water as Commodity - The Wrong Prescription, The Institute for
Food and Development Policy, Backgrounder, Summer 2001, Vol. 7, No. 3
25) Consumerism, Volunteer Now! (undated)
26) State of the World’s Children, 2005, UNICEF
27) Eileen Alt Powell, Some 600,000 join millionaire ranks in 2004, Associate Press,
June 9, 2005
What is Poverty?

There are plenty of statistics and data about global poverty--these are just a few:

      Each year, more than 8 million people around the world die because they are too
       poor to stay alive.
      Over 1 billion people—1 in 6 people around the world—live in extreme poverty,
       defined as living on less than $1 a day.
      More than 800 million go hungry each day.
      Over 100 million primary school-age children cannot go to school.

Based on definitions established by the World Bank (see sidebar), nearly 3 billion
people—half of the world's population—are considered poor. But poverty isn't simply a
numbers game. It's about scores of men, women and children enduring unimaginable
obstacles that keep them from fulfilling their most basic human rights and achieving their
individual potentials.
When the United Nations created the Universal Declaration of Human Rights in 1948,
signatories proclaimed that all people have the right to education, work, health and well-
being. But today, millions around the world are too crippled by poverty to fulfill
these basic rights. Millions continue to go hungry. Scores of children never step inside a
classroom. Families watch their loved ones die from largely preventable causes because
they do not have access to adequate medical care. In essence, poverty is a denial of
human rights.

A Global Partnership to Fight Poverty

According to the United Nations and its affiliated development experts, an end to
extreme poverty can be achieved. Effectively tackling global poverty demands a multi-
pronged approach and there is no single cure-all. Issues of poverty are many and
complex: Initiatives must address interwoven but distinct issues such as children's rights,
women's rights, epidemics such as HIV/AIDS, access to clean water and sanitation, and
preservation of the world's natural resources—just to name a few.
The Millennium Development Goals, agreed to by the international community in 2000,
represent an unprecedented opportunity for the world to usher in a new era of
collaboration in fighting poverty. The Goals set forth concrete targets for significantly
reducing extreme poverty and related ills by 2015. We are now one-third of the way to
the deadline, and with just a decade to go, there is much work to be done.
Based on current trends, most developing countries will fail to meet the majority of the
MDG's by 2015. The world has heralded 2005 as a milestone year in the fight against
poverty, and has even been given the moniker of "The Year of Development."
Many believe that achieving the MDGs must involve a real and measurable focus on
Goal 8: partnerships for development. Governments working together with civil
society, multilateral institutions and private sector entities is not just a nice idea, it is
indeed what is needed to make poverty history.
Sources: Jeffrey Sachs, The End of Poverty (2005); World Bank; UN
      Statistics on Poverty and Inequality
                           By Jeff Gates
                        Shared Capitalism Institute
                                May 1999

 The United Nations Development Program (UNDP) reported in 1998
that the world's 225 richest people now have a combined wealth of $1
trillion. That's equal to the combined annual income of the world's 2.5
billion poorests people.

 The wealth of the three most well-to-do individuals now exceeds the
combined GDP of the 48 least developed countries.

 While global GNP grew 40 percent between 1970 and 1985 (suggesting
widening prosperity), the number of poor grew by 17 percent.

 Although 200 million people saw their incomes fall between 1965 and
1980, more than 1 billion people experienced a drop from 1980 to 1993.

 In sub-Saharan Africa, twenty nations remain below their per capita
incomes of two decades ago while among Latin American and Caribbean
countries, eighteen are below their per capita incomes of ten years ago.

 UNDP reported in 1996 that 100 countries were worse off than 15 years

 Three decades ago, the people in well-to-do countries were 30 times
better off than those in countries where the poorest 20 percent of the
world's people live. By 1998, this gap had widened to 82 times (up from
61 times since 1996).

 In 1998, that 20 percent of the world's people living in the highest-
income countries accounted for 86 percent of total private consumption
expenditures while the poorest 20 percent accounted for only 1.3 percent.
That's down from 2.3 percent three decades ago.

 At present, 3 billion people live on less than $2 per day while 1.3 billion
get by on less than $1 per day. Seventy percent of those living on less than
$1 per day are women. With global population expanding 80 million per
year, World Bank President James D. Wolfensohn cautions that, unless we
address "the challenge of inclusion," 30 years hence we will have 5 billion
people living on less than $2 per day.
 Two billion people worldwide now suffer from anemia, including 55
million in industrial countries. Given current trends in population growth
and prosperity-hoarding, three decades from now we could have a world
in which 3.7 billion people are anemic.

 These related phenomena led UN development experts to observe that
the world is heading toward "grotesque inequalities," concluding:
"Development that perpetuates today's inequalities is neither sustainable
nor worth sustaining."

 UNDP calculates that an annual 4 percent levy on the world's 225 most
well-to-do people (average 1998 wealth: $4.5 billion) would suffice to
provide the following essentials for all those in developing countries:
adequate food, safe water and sanitation, basic education, basic health care
and reproductive health care. At present, 160 of those individuals live in
OECD countries; 60 reside in the United States.

 As of 1995 (the latest figures available), Federal Reserve research found
that the wealth of the top one percent of Americans is greater than that of
the bottom 95 percent. Three years earlier, the Fed's Survey of Consumer
Finance found that the top one percent had wealth greater than the bottom
90 percent.

 From 1983-1995 only the top five percent of households saw an
increase in their net worth while only the top 20 percent experienced an
increase in their income.

 Wealth projections through 1997 suggest that 86 percent of stock
market gains between 1989 and 1997 went to the top ten percent of
households while 42 percent went to the most well-to-do one percent.

 Stock market participation is broad but remarkably shallow. Though
more American adults own stocks and stock mutual funds than at any time
in history, 71 percent of households own no shares at all or hold less than
$2,000, including mutual funds and popular 401(k) plans.

 Adjusting for inflation, the net worth of the median American
household fell 10 percent between 1989 and 1997, declining from $54,600
to $49,900. The net worth of the top one percent is now 2.4 times the
combined wealth of the poorest 80 percent.

 The modest net worth of white families is 8 times that of African-
Americans and 12 times that of Hispanics. The median financial wealth of
African-Americans (net worth less home equity) is $200 (one percent of
the $18,000 for whites) while that of Hispanics is zero.
 Between 1983 and 1995, the bottom 40 percent of households lost 80
percent of their net worth. The middle fifth lost 11 percent. By 1995, 18.5
percent of households had zero or negative net worth (an average -$5,600,
down from -$3,000 in 1983).

 By 1995, the middle quintile of income-earners had only enough
savings to maintain their current standard of living for 1.2 months (i.e., if
they lost their jobs). That's down from 3.6 months in 1989.

 Household debt as a percentage of personal income rose from 58
percent in 1973 to an estimated 85 percent in 1997.

 In 1997, 1.4 million Americans filed for personal bankruptcy. That
works out to roughly 7,000 bankruptcies per hour, 8 hours a day, 5 days a

 Though average household income rose 10 percent between 1979 and
1994, 97 percent of that gain was claimed by the most well-to-do 20

 In 1998, weekly wages were 12 percent lower than in 1973 on an
inflation-adjusted basis. Productivity rose 33 percent over that perioo. Had
pay kept pace with productivity, the average hourly wage would now be
$18.10, rather than $12.77. That translates into a difference in annual pay
of $11,000 for a full-time, year-round worker.

 Between 1970 and 1990, the typical American worked an additional 163
hours per year. That's equivalent to adding an additional month of work
per year - for the same or less pay.

 In 1996, the Census Bureau reported record-level inequality, with the
top fifth of U.S. households claiming 48.2 percent of national income
while the bottom fifth gets by on 3.6 percent.

 In 1973, the income of the top 20 percent of American families was 7.5
times that of the bottom 20 percent. By 1996, it was 13 times.

 Business Week reports that in 1999 top executives earned 419 times the
average wage of a blue-collar worker, up from 326:1 in 1998. In 1980, the
ratio was 42:1.

 In 1982, inclusion on the Forbes 400 list of richest Americans required
personal wealth of $91million. The list then included 13 billionaires. By
1998, $500 million was required and the list included 189 billionaires.
Note, however, that Forbes 1998 figures were based on a September 1,
       1998 Dow-Jones Industrial Average of 7827. The Dow topped 10,000 in
       early 1999.

        The combined net worth of the Forbes 400 was $738 billion on
       September 1, 1998. That's up from $624 billion in 1997. That's an average
       one-year increase of $285 million per person. That works out to $780,000
       per day or $32,500 per hour ($541 per second).

        Microsoft CEO Bill Gates has more wealth than the bottom 45 percent
       of American households combined.

 Spending on luxury goods grew by 21 percent from 1995 to 1996 while overall
merchandise sales grew only 5 percent.

           Inequality Rising Despite Promises of
                      UN Expert Says
                                       UN News
                                    February 9, 2007

       Much of the world has seen "a significant and disturbing increase of
       inequality" in the last two decades, contradicting predictions that
       globalization and liberalization would foster more equal opportunities, a
       senior United Nations economist said today.

       "The evidence is quite clear," Assistant Secretary-General for Economic
       Development Jomo Kwame Sundaram said at a press briefing at the world
       body's Headquarters in New York. "Inequality has grown at two levels:
       between countries and within most countries - with the notable exceptions
       of Northern Europe and some Middle Eastern and North African

       The increase of inequality across the world "is very contradictory to the
       proponents of the 'flat world idea,'" he said. "They basically argue that, as
       a consequence of globalization and economic liberalization, the result will
       be a much more equitable world with equal opportunities, and
       unfortunately the contrary has been the case."

       This surge of inequality had very important implications for efforts to
       reduce poverty, Mr. Sundaram said. Much of the world had experienced
       slower economic growth in the last three decades, and with increasing
       inequality it was not surprising there had not been a significant decrease in
       the hundreds of millions of people who are poor.

       The remedy was to try and create full, productive and decent employment,
       he said. "There is no real way we can reduce poverty except by creating
       jobs, and this is something we need to recognize." Despite the improved
       economic growth in the last five years, there had been a worldwide decline
       in the number of jobs and an increase in unemployment and
       underemployment. Inequality should be moved at the top of the
       development agenda, he said, and the focus should remain on the close
       interrelationship between inequality, poverty and unemployment.

       Mr. Sundaram was presenting the new book Flat World, Big Gaps, which
       he co-edited with social development expert Jacques Baudot, who was
       also present at the briefing.

       "The book tries to restore the linkage between the reduction of inequality
       and reduction of poverty," Mr. Baudot said. "It shows that the question of
       economic growth is not simply a matter of increasing the aggregate of
       income, but is a matter of the kind of growth, the composition of it and
       whom it has benefited."

World Bank poverty data, methodology faulted

Two US academics have disputed the validity of the World Bank’s global poverty
statistics, exposing serious conceptual and methodological shortcomings in its
calculations of poverty levels worldwide. Use of these flawed figures, they
contend, may have led to a substantial underestimation of the extent of world
poverty and to mistaken inferences that global income poverty has fallen.
by Chakravarthi Raghavan

GENEVA: The World Bank’s global poverty statistics, based on income and
purchasing power parity, are produced using wrong methodologies and are
unreliable for estimating levels, distribution and trends of global poverty,
according to two academics of Columbia University in New York.
The issue of poverty figured prominently in the run-up to and at the Copenhagen
Social Summit of 1995, where, under the pressure of civil society groups, the
Summit said that each country must define an absolute poverty line and aim to
eradicate it by a target date to be set by each country.
The Washington-based international financial institutions and Washington itself
(both pushing the Washington Consensus and, after the Mexican peso crisis,
pushing the same policies under a different name, “globalization”) as well as the
Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD) had not been
keen on the Copenhagen Summit in the first place, and were not at all happy
when that meeting came up with 10 commitments.
The World Bank then hijacked the poverty issue to argue that the “good policies”
(of the Washington Consensus), with some more aid, reduced poverty in
countries and that the Bank was best situated to deliver these.
With the International Monetary Fund (IMF), and the UN and UN Development
Programme (UNDP), soon joining to have a piece of the action, a new
combination emerged by the time of the Copenhagen+5 Summit in Geneva in
2000 to push and promote the Fund-Bank policies and provision of more aid by
the OECD countries to countries which practised the “good policies.”
To show that their policies are working, the World Bank defined (a global level of)
absolute poverty on the basis of incomes to satisfy the “most compelling of
human desires”, and then refined it in statistical terms by defining absolute
poverty as per capita income (in purchasing power parity, PPP, terms) of $1 a
day in Asia and Africa, and $2 a day in Latin America and the Caribbean. It called
for halving the poverty levels by 2015 and for aid to be provided and channelled
based on good policies. On this basis, the Bank has been calculating and
publishing data on poverty in countries to claim that global poverty is being
Civil society groups are not equipped to challenge these methodologies, but at
Copenhagen+5 challenged the claims of poverty reduction on the basis that at
country level there was not much indication thereof and the social goals set at
Copenhagen were in fact slipping.
The poverty estimates had a utility other than in policy debate terms. They
became the basis for providing aid (even when bilateral aid policies of the US,
Europe and Japan had no relationships to these but were based on alliance,
military and strategic considerations).

Methodology challenged

The Least Developed Countries Report 2002, recently published by the UN
Conference on Trade and Development (UNCTAD) (see TWE #283), questioned
the World Bank’s poverty data calculated from household surveys, and said
these understated the extent of poverty in Africa, particularly sub-Saharan Africa
(where most of the LDCs are). It suggested that a better method would be to use
national income statistics and that aid should be allocated on that basis.
The report did not challenge the income approach to judging poverty, merely
whether it should be calculated by using national income data or household
surveys (or a mixture of both).
The two US academics, Sanjay G. Reddy and Thomas W. Pogge, have
challenged the methodology used by the Bank and given a scathing account of
the problems with the Bank’s poverty numbers (bringing out, incidentally, that
poverty is more widespread in South Asia and some other Asian countries than
the Bank has calculated).
In a paper published on the website, Reddy and Pogge
say that the estimates of the extent, distribution and trend of global income
poverty provided in the Bank’s World Development Reports for 1990 and
2000/01 “are neither meaningful nor reliable.”
The Bank, the two academics charge, uses “an arbitrary international poverty line
unrelated to any clear conception of what poverty is, employs a misleading and
inaccurate measure of purchasing power ‘equivalence’ that creates serious and
irreparable difficulties for international and inter-temporal comparisons of income
poverty, and extrapolates incorrectly from limited data and thereby creates an
appearance of precision that masks the high probable error of its estimates.”
The academics are “surprised” that the Bank has been publishing regular poverty
statistics for 12 years now, “precise” to six digits and very widely used in
academic publications and popular media all over the world, without significant
attention having been paid to the massive flaws in its procedures. It is hard not to
see this fact as indicative of the low priority that has hitherto been attached to the
global problem of persistent severe poverty.
As a result of these flaws, “there is a large understatement of the extent of global
income poverty and ... an incorrect inference that it has declined,” Reddy and
Pogge say, suggesting that “a new methodology of global poverty assessment is
feasible and necessary.”
In the 1990 World Development Report (WDR), and subsequently in WDR
2000/01, the two academics say, the World Bank presented groundbreaking
comprehensive estimates of the number of poor people in the world as a whole
and in its regions, in different years. These estimates have been widely accepted
and employed for a range of policy analyses and assessments.
A primary conclusion of WDR 2000/01 is that the world is indeed on the right
The two academics note that estimates of the number of poor people in the world
also influence assessments of the seriousness of the problem of world poverty,
the scale of resources that should be devoted to reducing it, and the regions to
which these resources should be directed. WDR 2000/01 argues, for example,
that the largest number of the world’s poor are now in Africa rather than South
The questions of how many poor people there are in the world, how poor they
are, where they live, and how these facts are changing over time are clearly very
important ones. The Bank’s estimates of global income poverty are influential not
only because of their importance and usefulness, but because the Bank is
currently the sole producer of such estimates.
Conceptual errors

Reddy and Pogge argue that the Bank’s estimates of global poverty should not
be accepted, since “these estimates are flawed due to three related but distinct
types of significant conceptual errors, which make it impossible to use them to
identify with any reasonable accuracy the level, distribution or trend of global
The first type of error, the two academics say, involves the failure to define a
global poverty line that corresponds to a clear underlying concept of poverty, so
as to allow identification of the commodities that must be commanded in order to
avoid being poor. The second type of error involves the failure to employ
purchasing-power-parity factors that permit meaningful and accurate
identification of the national currency equivalents of the global poverty line, and
of changes in their value through time. The third type of error involves the
building into the methods used of false precision and mistaken inferences, in the
face of data limitations.
“These three types of error together lead to the likelihood of substantial
distortions in estimates of global poverty.” While it is impossible to identify
precisely the extent and direction of the gap between the Bank’s estimates and
those that would have been yielded by a sounder methodology, simple
estimation procedures suggest however “that the biases may be very substantial,
and may have led to a substantial underestimation of the extent of world
poverty.” These errors may also have led to false claims about downward trends
in global income poverty and “the mistaken inferences that global income poverty
has fallen.”
The two academics say that it is not difficult to describe a methodology for
assessing global poverty that would inspire substantially greater confidence, and
the adoption of such a sound methodology may not require significantly greater
effort or resources than that actually expended in producing current estimates.
“The current estimates should no longer be employed, and new ones
corresponding to a defensible methodology, covering past as well as current
years, should be generated.”
Income poverty is only one aspect of poverty, and other poverty estimates, based
on under-nutrition, infant mortality, access to health services, and other
indicators, can continue to inform us even in the absence of usable figures
concerning global income poverty. International development targets should
appropriately continue to focus on these measures of deprivation in the world,
while a new procedure for the global assessment of income poverty is developed
and implemented.
The procedure normally used in national exercises of poverty assessment,
Reddy and Pogge say, is to define a poverty line in terms of the cost of meeting a
set of minimal criteria. These minimal criteria are most often defined in terms of
access to some set of basic (for example, nutritional) capabilities or of
commodities that generate such capabilities. The commodity requirements
specified by their relation to a salient set of elementary capabilities in this way
can in principle be allowed to vary across groups of persons (defined, for
instance, by age, gender and other factors). Procedures of this general kind have
the advantage that, once fixed, they offer a consistent basis for determining the
level of the poverty line across time and space. Of course, they also face
difficulties. When specified too rigidly, a commodity-specification approach may
fail to take note of the substitution possibilities available to the poor when prices
change, which may enable them to escape poverty at lower incomes than
suggested by updating the cost of a fixed bundle.
Such approaches may also fail to account for the fact that escaping poverty may
require additional commodity resources when a society becomes more
prosperous. A capability approach seeks to take account not only of people’s
command over commodities, but of what they can do with these commodities,
and therefore of their diverse needs, handicaps and endowments. It should
therefore ideally find a plausible way of gathering and integrating such
information, although it may choose to limit the attention to such diversity as a
matter of informational or resource constraints. The approach of defining a
poverty line in terms of the resources necessary to achieve a salient set of
elementary capabilities offers a feasible methodology for consistent poverty
assessment across time and space, and for this reason has been widely
The methodology pursued by the Bank in its landmark 1990 and 2000/01 global
poverty assessment exercises does not correspond to such a procedure, say
Reddy and Pogge in explaining the method adopted by the Bank (and outlined in
the Bank staff papers, but merely footnoted in the Bank’s publications and to
which few, including critics, pay attention).
In 1990, the Bank constructed a global poverty line from a set of official domestic
poverty lines for 33 countries surveyed during the mid-1980s. These official
domestic poverty lines were scaled upward or downward by changes in the
national consumer price index to their “equivalent” in 1985 national currency
units. These 1985 national currency units were then converted into a common
unit of “real purchasing power” equivalence using the 1985 purchasing-power-
parity conversion factors for consumption (expressed in US dollars) calculated by
R. Summers and A. Heston in 1988. A global poverty line of $31 per month was
chosen on the basis that the official domestic poverty lines of eight of the poorer
countries in the sample, converted into dollars in this way, were very close to it.
This “most typical” poverty line became the “$1 (PPP 1985) a day” (actually
$1.02 PPP 1985) global poverty line applied in WDR 1990 (and subsequently
revised downward, without justification, to $1 in Chen, Datt and Ravallion (1994)
in the World Bank paper “Is poverty increasing in the developing world?”). This
uniform poverty line was then converted to the national currency units of different
countries using the Penn World Tables PPP conversion factors for 1985. The
resulting poverty line was then inflated or deflated as appropriate by changes in
the national consumer price index (as reported in the IMF International Financial
Statistics) and applied to household survey data to create a measure of the
number of poor persons in a country in a particular year.
However, for the 2000 poverty estimates exercise, the Bank established a new
poverty line. For the same list of 33 countries used earlier, the Bank identified the
10 with the now lowest poverty line when converted to the 1993 $PPP, using
consumption factors for conversion, and chose the median of these poverty lines
- $1.08 PPP 1993 a day - as its new poverty line. The Bank has provided no
justification for this change.
It is impossible to say whether the new poverty line is “higher” or “lower”, say
Reddy and Pogge, since PPP dollars corresponding to different years are not in
any way comparable. However, these methodologies result in some confusion.
The methodological shift in global poverty assessment from WDR 1990 to WDR
2000/01, they say, entailed significant changes in the extent of poverty deemed
to exist in many countries and regions. Though the Bank claims that the total
number of poor persons under the two methodologies is roughly the same, in
view of the magnitude of the shift in the regional composition of poverty caused
by the change in methodology, there is no reason to expect that the total would
continue to be similar for subsequent years.
Calling for the adoption of new procedures urgently to calculate the poverty
levels, Reddy and Pogge say that there are “strong reasons to doubt the
reliability and meaning of the estimates of the level, distribution and trend of
global poverty” provided in WDR 1990 and WDR 2000/01.
The reasons for doubt, they say, revolve around the lack of a well-defined
poverty line that permits meaningful and reliable inter-temporal and inter-spatial
comparisons, the use of misleading and inaccurate measures of purchasing
power equivalence and building into the methods use of false precision and
mistaken inferences in the face of data limitations. All these flaws are likely to
“systematically distort” the trend of global income poverty, and much of the
distortion is in the direction of understating the extent of poverty in the world.
Moreover, say Reddy and Pogge, statements that global poverty is decreasing
have no evidential justification in the light of these distortions. “The problems are
readily avoidable,” although their avoidance would require a fundamental change
in the methodology of global poverty assessment.
The rejection of the Bank’s procedure does not, however, support the sceptical
conclusion that the attempt to provide a standard of income poverty comparable
across time and space is doomed to fail. Much better procedures are available
and, given the modest informational and institutional requirements, can be easily
As an alternative procedure, Reddy and Pogge suggest the construction of a
reference basket of commodities containing relevant characteristics (for e.g.,
calorific content) that enable them to meet the elementary consumption needs of
individuals. The international poverty line is then defined as the amount of
national currency minimally necessary to each country or more specific locality to
purchase this reference basket.
This procedure would focus on whether the incomes of poor people are
sufficient, not in relation to all prices everywhere but rather in relation to the local
prices of goods that are relevant to meeting their elementary requirements. The
reference basket should be composed of commodities that are defined in a
suitably abstract way so as to take reasonable account of local variation in
tastes, while also possessing the characteristics that enable elementary
requirements to be met. (SUNS5180)
From Third World Economics No. 287 (16-31 August 2002)

Global Poverty: The Gap Between the World� Rich
and Poor Is Growing, and the Dying Continues
By far the most frequently unfulfilled human rights in our time are social and economic
ones, such as everyone� right "to a standard of living adequate for the health and well-
being of oneself and one� family, including food, clothing, housing, and medical care."
Even with regard to global deficits in civil and political human rights, which are mainly
concerned with the democratic exercise of power, due process, and the rule of law,
poverty plays a decisive role.
Extremely poor people are often physically and mentally stunted due to malnutrition in
infancy, unable even to read and write due to lack of schooling, and much preoccupied
with their family� survival. They can cause little harm or benefit to the politicians and
officials who rule them. Such rulers have little incentive to pay attention to the interests
of the poor and cater instead to the interests of agents more capable of reciprocation,
including foreign governments, companies, and tourists.
In describing global poverty, I will concentrate on (1) the extent of absolute poverty, how
severe and widespread it is; (2) the extent of global inequality, which is a rough measure
of the avoidability of poverty and the opportunity cost to the affluent of its avoidance;
and (3) the trend of the first two aspects, that is, how global poverty and inequality tend
to develop over time.
Let me summarize the state of our world in regard to these three aspects. The World
Bank estimates that one fifth of all human beings� out of 6 billion�       live below the
international poverty line, which it currently defines in terms of $32.74 PPP 1993 per
month or $1.08 PPP 1993 per day. PPP stands for purchasing power parity, so people
count as poor by this standard when their income per person per year has less purchasing
power than $393 had in the U.S. in 1993 or less than $466 have in the U.S. in the year
Those living below this poverty line fall, on average, 30 percent below it. So they live on
$326 PPP 2000 per person per year on average. Now the $PPP incomes the World Bank
ascribes to people in poor countries are on average about four times higher than their
actual incomes at market exchange rates. Since virtually all the global poor live in such
poor developing countries, we can estimate that their average annual per capita income
of $326 PPP 2000 corresponds to about $82 at market exchange rates.
On average, the global poor can buy as much per person per year as we can buy with
$326 in a rich country or with $82 in a poor country. These are the poorest of the poor.
The World Bank provides statistics for a more generous poverty line that is twice as high:
$786 PPP 1993 ($932 PPP or roughly $233 in the year 2000) per person per year. 2.8
billion people are said to live below this higher poverty line, falling 44.4 percent below it
on average. This much larger group of people�                                  can
                                                  nearly half of humankind� then, on
average, buy as much per person per year as we can buy with $518 in a rich country or
with $130 in a poor one.
The consequences of such extreme poverty are foreseeable and extensively documented:
13 percent of the world� population (790 million) lack adequate nutrition, 17 percent
(one billion) lack access to safe drinking water, 30 percent (over 2.4 billion) lack basic
sanitation, approximately one billion adults are illiterate, 15 percent (more than 880
million) have no access to basic medical care, 17 percent (approximately one billion) lack
adequate shelter, and 33 percent (2 billion) have no electricity.
Fully one third of all human deaths are due to poverty-related causes, such as starvation,
diarrhea, pneumonia, measles, and malaria, which could be prevented or cured cheaply
through food, safe drinking water, vaccinations, rehydration packs, or medicines. One
quarter of all five to 14-year-olds work outside their family for wages, often under harsh
conditions, in mining, textile and carpet production, prostitution, factories, and in
Severe poverty is, of course, nothing new. What is new is the extent of global inequality.
Real wealth is no longer limited to a small elite. Hundreds of millions enjoy a high
standard of living with plenty of spare time, travel, education, cars, domestic appliances,
computers, and so on. While average per capita annual income is about $82 in the bottom
fifth (or quintile) and $131 among the bottom 46 percent of humankind, it is $26,000 in
the so-called high-income economies consisting of 33 countries plus Hong Kong.
The collective income of the bottom quintile is about $100 billion annually or one third
of one percent of the annual global product. The collective income of the bottom 46
percent is about $364 billion annually or 1.25 percent of the annual global product. By
contrast, the high-income economies contain 14.9 percent of world population and
control 78.4 percent of the global product. This contrast indicates what an economic
reform bringing all incomes up to the World Bank� doubled poverty line would cost
members of high-income economies: just over one percent of our income.
Global inequality is even greater in regard to property and wealth. Affluent people have
on average more wealth than annual income, while the poor, on average, own
significantly less than one annual income. The enormous fortunes of the super-rich in
developed societies were given special emphasis in the penultimate Human Development
Report: "The world� 200 richest people more than doubled their net worth in the four
years to 1998, to more than $1 trillion. The assets of the top three billionaires are more
than the combined GNP of all least developed countries and their 600 million people."
The last 50 years give the impression of rapid progress, punctuated by a long series of
human rights declarations and treaties, new initiatives, summits, as well as detailed
research into the quantification, causes, and effects of poverty. Such things are not
unimportant. But they disguise the fact that real progress for the poor themselves is less
Yes, life expectancy has risen markedly in most countries and infant mortality has fallen
substantially due to better disease control. But the number of people subsisting below the
international poverty line has increased slightly since 1987, and has increased a lot when
the special case of China is left aside. In the same period, the increase in the number of
people living below the doubled poverty line is even more dramatic. And this despite the
fact that this period has seen exceptional technological and economic progress as well as
a dramatic decline in defense expenditures.
The number of malnourished people has likewise been basically flat at about 800
million�   even though real prices of basic foodstuffs have fallen by 32 percent on average
between 1985 and 2000. In the 13 years since the end of the Cold War, well over 200
million people, mostly children, have died from poverty-related causes.
While the trend in poverty and malnutrition is basically flat, the trend in global
inequality, and hence in the avoidability of poverty, is dramatically negative: "The
income gap between the fifth of the world� people living in the richest countries and the
fifth in the poorest was 74 to 1 in 1997, up from 60 to 1 in 1990 and 30 to 1 in 1960.
[Earlier] the income gap between the top and bottom countries increased from 3 to 1 in
1820 to 7 to 1 in 1870 to 11 to 1 in 1913." There is a long-established trend toward ever
greater international income inequality� this trend is accelerating: The figures just
cited indicate an average annual growth gap of 1.66 percent for the colonial era (1820-
1960), 2.34 percent for the period from 1960-90, and 3.00 percent for the period of 1990-
Think for a moment about how much ordinary Americans know about these facts. As the
media presented retrospectives on the 20th century, they gave ample space to its human-
made horrors: six million murdered in the German holocaust, 30 million starved to death
in Mao� Great Leap Forward, 11 million wiped out by Stalin, two million killed by the
Khmer Rouge, half a million hacked to death in Rwanda. When there are earthquakes,
storms, and floods, we have them on the evening news, with footage of desperate parents
grieving for their dead children.
What is not mentioned in the retrospectives and not shown on the evening news are the
ordinary deaths from starvation and preventable diseases�     some 200 million in just the
few years since the end of the Cold War. Most of these 18 million dying each year are
children whose parents simply cannot afford to give them access to safe water, nutritious
food, vaccines, or basic medications. These deaths are not photogenic and quite
disturbing, and we would rather not learn about them. So the media, ever catering to our
tastes, leave them out. And the dying continues.
This is excerpted from a talk by Pogge at the Fifth Annual Charles T. & Louise H.
Travers Conference on Ethics and Government Accountability: �        Responsibility in the
Global Age.�The full text, along with all conference materials, is available at:




The Holy Bible, New International Version. Rev 17:16.
Rev 17:16
          The beast and the ten horns d you saw will hate the prostitute. e They will
bring her to ruin f and leave her naked; g they will eat her flesh h and burn her
with fire. i
Rev 17:17
          For God has put it into their hearts j to accomplish his purpose by
agreeing to give the beast their power to rule, k until God’s words are fulfilled. l

European disobedience in persecuting, murdering, and oppressing the Jewish
people, in addition for being greedy over the spoils of war caused the Crusades
to fail. Muslims have given Allah their power to rule, until God’s words are
fulfilled. Across the pages of history, the God of Israel has allowed the center of
MONEY and WORLD TRADE to be destroyed by a determined enemy. Because
Europeans forsook the God of Israel to worship MONEY, GREED, and have
again ignored God’s Chosen People Israel, the God Of Israel allowed the
enemies of America and Israel to destroy the World Trade Center in the same
way that the Romans completely destroyed the Second Jewish Temple and in
the same way Muslims desecrated the Temple Mount and built a shrine in honor
of a false god and a false prophet. For all who worshiped a false god and a false
prophet, including the worshipers of the god of MONEY, desolation has come to
the entire world – because the world forsook the God of Israel to follow Satan.

September 11, 2001 MIRRORS the historical destruction of the Second Temple by the
Roman Empire and the Current Golden Dome of the Rock, enshrines the destruction of
the Jewish Temple, whose God the nations have forsaken to worship and serve other
The Holy Bible, New International Version. Hag 1:3.
Hag 1:3
        Then the word of the LORD came through the prophet Haggai: k
Hag 1:4
        “Is it a time for you yourselves to be living in your paneled houses, l while
this house remains a ruin? m ”
Hag 1:5
        Now this is what the LORD Almighty says: “Give careful thought n to your
Hag 1:6
        You have planted much, but have harvested little. o You eat, but never
have enough. p You drink, but never have your fill. q You put on clothes, but are
not warm. You earn wages, r only to put them in a purse with holes in it.”
Hag 1:7
        This is what the LORD Almighty says: “Give careful thought s to your ways.
Hag 1:8
        Go up into the mountains and bring down timber t and build the house, so
that I may take pleasure u in it and be honored, v ” says the LORD.
Hag 1:9
        “You expected much, but see, it turned out to be little. w What you brought
home, I blew x away. Why?” declares the LORD Almighty. “Because of my
house, which remains a ruin, y while each of you is busy with his own house.
Hag 1:10
         Therefore, because of you the heavens have withheld z their dew a and
the earth its crops. b
Hag 1:11
         I called for a drought c on the fields and the mountains, d on the grain, the
new wine, e the oil f and whatever the ground produces, on men and cattle, and
on the labor of your hands. g


According to a traditional account, in 638 A.D., the second Islamic Caliph Omar
entered Jerusalem and found the site of the Rock under a dunghill. Caliph Omar
was appalled by the trash and filth that had accumulated on the barren Temple
Mount. Apparently he personally cleared out a handful of trash from the Rock as
a sign of reverance for the place where Muhammad is said to have ascended to
Heaven. The Byzantine Empire had left the Temple Mount barren as a sign of
God’s Judgment against Israel and so when the Muslims gained control of
Jerusalem, they built mosques, shrines, and the Dome of the Rock on the
Temple Mount. In 691 the Umayyad Caliph ‘Abd al-Malik’ built a wooden dome
over the Rock that Caliph Omar had cleared the trash from. It became known as
the “mosque of Omar,” or, the Dome of the Rock which is considered by Muslims
the crown of the Haram al-Sharif (Temple Mount).


The Holy Bible, New International Version. Zec 12:2.
Zec 12:2
         “I am going to make Jerusalem a cup y that sends all the surrounding
peoples reeling. z Judah a will be besieged as well as Jerusalem.
Zec 12:3
         On that day, when all the nations b of the earth are gathered against her, I
will make Jerusalem an immovable rock c for all the nations. All who try to move
it will injure d themselves.
Zec 12:4
         On that day I will strike every horse with panic and its rider with madness,”
declares the LORD. “I will keep a watchful eye over the house of Judah, but I will
blind all the horses of the nations. e
Zec 12:5
         Then the leaders of Judah will say in their hearts, ‘The people of
Jerusalem are strong, f because the LORD Almighty is their God.’
Zec 12:6
         “On that day I will make the leaders of Judah like a firepot g in a woodpile,
like a flaming torch among sheaves. They will consume h right and left all the
surrounding peoples, but Jerusalem will remain intact i in her place.
Zec 12:7
         “The LORD will save the dwellings of Judah first, so that the honor of the
house of David and of Jerusalem’s inhabitants may not be greater than that of
Judah. j
Zec 12:8
         On that day the LORD will shield k those who live in Jerusalem, so that the
feeblest l among them will be like David, and the house of David will be like God,
   like the Angel of the LORD going before n them.
Zec 12:9
         On that day I will set out to destroy all the nations o that attack Jerusalem.


The Holy Bible, New International Version. Luke 21:25.

On the earth, nations will be in anguish and perplexity at the roaring and tossing
of the sea. a
Lk 21:26
         Men will faint from terror, apprehensive of what is coming on the world, for
the heavenly bodies will be shaken. b


              The walls of Babylon ---- Rebuilt and restored


The Holy Bible, New International Version. Ge 11:1.

The Tower of Babel
Ge 11:1
        Now the whole world had one language k and a common speech.
Ge 11:2
        As men moved eastward, 58 they found a plain in Shinar 59 l and settled
Ge 11:3
        They said to each other, “Come, let’s make bricks m and bake them
thoroughly.” They used brick instead of stone, n and tar o for mortar.
Ge 11:4
        Then they said, “Come, let us build ourselves a city, with a tower that
reaches to the heavens, p so that we may make a name q for ourselves and not
be scattered r over the face of the whole earth.” s
Ge 11:5
        But the LORD came down t to see the city and the tower that the men were
Ge 11:6
        The LORD said, “If as one people speaking the same language u they have
begun to do this, then nothing they plan to do will be impossible for them. _

The Holy Bible, New International Version. Daniel 4:28.
Da 4:28
        All this happened e to King Nebuchadnezzar.
Da 4:29
        Twelve months later, as the king was walking on the roof of the royal
palace of Babylon,
Da 4:30
        he said, “Is not this the great Babylon I have built as the royal residence, by
my mighty power and for the glory f of my majesty?” g

A fiery explosion resulting from impact of two hijacked,
civilian planes into the World Trade Center Towers. The
World Trade Center Towers of New York City have
Spencer Platt - Getty Images

The Holy Bible, New International Version. Rev 17:4.
Rev 17:4
         The woman was dressed in purple and scarlet, and was glittering with
gold, precious stones and pearls. d She held a golden cup e in her hand, filled
with abominable things and the filth of her adulteries. f
Rev 17:5
         This title was written on her forehead:

Rev 17:6
      I saw that the woman was drunk with the blood of the saints, j the blood of
those who bore testimony to Jesus.

What we learn from King Nebuchadnezzar, the Tower of Babel, the World Trade Center
Towers, and the destruction of the Second Jewish Temple are one and the same lesson:

If we turn away from the Lord, the God of Israel, and worship and serve other gods, and
even worship and serve ourselves, as Saddam Hussein did in the mirror of King
Nebuchadnezzar, PRIDE goes before a fall.

In the words of Earth’s Messiah: YOU CAN’T SERVE BOTH GOD AND MONEY!

Don’t blame God for why the world is being destroyed. We followed anti-Christ
principles that led to the destruction and death of everyone. OUR SIN destroyed our own
personal lives, the lives of others, and the entire world.

Will we ever learn from history?
The Holy Bible, New International Version. Luke 14:33.
Lk 14:33
     In the same way, any of you who does not give up everything he has
cannot be my disciple. o

The Holy Bible, New International Version. Mt 8:20.
Mt 8:20
     Jesus replied, “Foxes have holes and birds of the air have nests, but the
Son of Man c has no place to lay his head.”

The Holy Bible, New International Version. Mt 24:15.
Mt 24:15
         “So when you see standing in the holy place w ‘the abomination that
causes desolation,’ 105 x spoken of through the prophet Daniel—let the reader
Mt 24:16
         then let those who are in Judea flee to the mountains.
Mt 24:17
         Let no one on the roof of his house y go down to take anything out of the
Mt 24:18
         Let no one in the field go back to get his cloak.

The Holy Bible, New International Version. Luke 23:26.
Lk 23:26
         As they led him away, they seized Simon from Cyrene, k who was on his
way in from the country, and put the cross on him and made him carry it behind
Jesus. l
Lk 23:27
         A large number of people followed him, including women who mourned
and wailed m for him.
Lk 23:28
         Jesus turned and said to them, “Daughters of Jerusalem, do not weep for
me; weep for yourselves and for your children. n
Lk 23:29
         For the time will come when you will say, ‘Blessed are the barren women,
the wombs that never bore and the breasts that never nursed!’ o
Lk 23:30
         Then “ ‘they will say to the mountains, “Fall on us!” and to the hills, “Cover
       91 p
us!” ’
Lk 23:31
         For if men do these things when the tree is green, what will happen when it
is dry?” q
Lk 23:32
         Two other men, both criminals, were also led out with him to be executed. r
Lk 23:33
         When they came to the place called the Skull, there they crucified him,
along with the criminals—one on his right, the other on his left.
Lk 23:34
         Jesus said, “Father, s forgive them, for they do not know what they are
doing.” 92 t And they divided up his clothes by casting lots. u
Despite what the Satanic New Age money makers and robbers of God’s Creation teach
out of their many money-making institutions designed to make you a slave of SOCIAL
PROGRAMMING to turn away from the God of Israel through Jesus’ Name, the Bible is
VERY CLEAR that there is only ONE WAY to God:

The Holy Bible, New International Version. John 14:5.
Jn 14:5
        Thomas c said to him, “Lord, we don’t know where you are going, so how
can we know the way?”
Jn 14:6
        Jesus answered, “I am d the way e and the truth f and the life. g No one
comes to the Father except through me. h
Jn 14:7
        If you really knew me, you would know 71 my Father as well. i From now on,
you do know him and have seen him.”
Jn 14:8
        Philip j said, “Lord, show us the Father and that will be enough for us.”
Jn 14:9
        Jesus answered: “Don’t you know me, Philip, even after I have been among
you such a long time? Anyone who has seen me has seen the Father. k

The Holy Bible, New International Version. Jn 15:18.
Jn 15:18
         “If the world hates you, t keep in mind that it hated me first.
Jn 15:19
         If you belonged to the world, it would love you as its own. As it is, you do
not belong to the world, but I have chosen you u out of the world. That is why the
world hates you. v
Jn 15:20
         Remember the words I spoke to you: ‘No servant is greater than his
master.’ 74 w If they persecuted me, they will persecute you also. x

To top