Showing posts with label foreclosure global economics media real estate recession banking law. Show all posts
Showing posts with label foreclosure global economics media real estate recession banking law. Show all posts

Tuesday, November 9, 2010

With less money for prisons, states ease rules against ex-convicts


States across the country are passing laws intended to make ex-offenders more likely to find jobs and, as a result, less prone to commit crime again. Behind the legislative trend is an unusual combination of budget-conscious officials seeking to trim prison populations and activists opposing “structural discrimination” against applicants with criminal records.

Within the last four years, one-third of the states have approved legislation to improve employment prospects of residents with records, according to surveys by the National Conference of State Legislatures. Generally, the laws either allow otherwise qualified ex-offenders to progress further in the hiring process or shield official records of some offenses from employers conducting background checks.

Four states have passed laws that prohibit employers from inquiring about criminal history on initial job applications. Activists based in California are waging a national campaign to “ban the box,” a reference to a standard question many employers ask about whether an applicant has convictions or arrests.

The ban applies to public and private employers in Massachusetts but only to public agencies in Connecticut, Minnesota and New Mexico. The laws exempt employers such as day care centers and schools that have other legal mandates to check criminal records.

Before last year, Hawaii was the only state with a similar law.

“It's getting to be more and more an accepted idea,” said Madeline Neighly, an attorney with the National Employment Law Project, which provides technical assistance to state and local governments. “It creates a bigger, better applicant pool.”

About a dozen states have begun permitting people convicted of drug offenses, minor crimes or violations as juveniles to have their records sealed sooner or more easily. Nevada, for instance, requires special drug courts to seal the records of offenders after they complete drug or alcohol rehabilitation programs, eliminating a three-year waiting period. Washington automatically destroys some juvenile records three months after a youthful offender turns 18.

The trend of giving ex-offenders a better shot at a fresh start is strongest in the West, where seven of the 17 states with new laws are located. It extends into the South, a region historically tough on crime.

In South Carolina, a prison sentencing overhaul enacted in June includes a provision making first-time drug offenders eligible to have their sentences dismissed and records expunged. Gov. Mark Sanford, a conservative Republican, has predicted that the overall legislation will “both discourage recidivism and save taxpayer resources” because it would “limit unnecessary prison population increases.”

For the first time, Mississippi allows purging some felonies from public records. The law approved earlier this year applies to a single conviction for bouncing checks, possessing illegal drugs, shoplifting, stealing or engaging in malicious mischief. Such offenders can seek a court order five years after completing their sentences.

Taken together, the new state laws chip away at what All of Us Or None, the group in Oakland, Calif., that launched the “ban the box” campaign earlier this decade, calls “structural discrimination against formerly-incarcerated people.”

Nearly 40 percent of the country's 2.3 million inmates are Black, according to the U.S. Justice Department. In recent years, more than 700,000 offenders have been released annually. Most eventually return. Nationally, the recidivism rate approaches 70 percent.

Studies have shown consistently that ex-offenders are less likely to be incarcerated again if they are working. But their chances of landing a job are not good, despite federal and state laws banning blanket discrimination against applicants with criminal records. Young Black men with records, in particular, have a tough time in the job market.

Early this decade, Devah Pager, now a Princeton University sociologist, sent college-age White and Black men with similar qualifications to apply for entry-level jobs in Milwaukee, rotating which ones posed as former offenders. When the Black applicants faked having a criminal record, they received fewer than one-third as many callbacks from potential employers as White applicants playing the same role.

Other studies have shown, however, that ex-offenders stand a much better chance of being hired if they pass initial screenings and participate in an interview, during which they can explain in person past problems with the law.

Hawaii's pioneering law to ban initial inquiries about conviction records, adopted in 1998, also forbids employers from considering convictions until after a conditional offer of employment. The Chamber of Commerce of Hawaii balked initially but relented when the legislation was amended to allow withdrawal of offers if a potential hire's convictions have a “rational relationship” to a job's duties.

In Massachusetts, where Gov. Deval Patrick, a liberal Democrat, signed a less elaborate ban in August, a major business lobby dropped its opposition after employers were promised better access to official criminal records and protection from lawsuits if they reject applicants based on incorrect, state-supplied information. But applicants must approve employer requests for their state records and be given a copy if they are rejected for that reason.

“We just need to have the information to make the assessment based on risk and have that open and honest conversation” about an applicant's record, says Bradley MacDougall, associate vice president of Associated Industries of Massachusetts.

The Massachusetts law also reduces the number of years that criminal records are available to employers and the public—to 10 years for felonies, down from 15; and five years for misdemeanors, down from 10. “The best way to break the cycle of recidivism is to make it possible for people to get a job,” Mr. Patrick said.

States that have eased barriers to employment for former offenders since 2006 include, at least, Colorado, Connecticut, Hawaii, Illinois, Louisiana, Maryland, Massachusetts, Minnesota, Mississippi, Nevada, New Mexico, New York, South Carolina, South Dakota, Utah and Washington.

(Distributed by New America Media.)

Sunday, November 7, 2010

Conspiracy Theory with Jesse Ventura Season 2 Episode 3


The age of the dollar is drawing to a close


Right from the start of the financial crisis, it was apparent that one of its biggest long-term casualties would be the mighty dollar, and with it, very possibly, American economic hegemony. The process would take time – possibly a decade or more – but the starting gun had been fired.

At next week's meeting in Seoul of the G20's leaders, there will be no last rites – this hopelessly unwieldy exercise in global government wouldn't recognise a corpse if stood before it in a coffin – but it seems clear that this tragedy is already approaching its denouement.
To understand why, you have to go back to the origins of the credit crunch, which lay in the giant trade and capital imbalances that have long ruled the world economy. Over the past 20 years, the globe has become divided in highly dangerous ways into surplus and deficit nations: those that produced a surplus of goods and savings, and those that borrowed the savings to buy the goods.

It's a strange, Alice in Wonderland world that sees one of the planet's richest economies borrowing from one of the poorest to pay for goods way beyond the reach of the people actually producing them. But that process, in effect, came to define the relationship between America and China. The resulting credit-fuelled glut in productive capacity was almost bound to end in a corrective global recession, even without the unsustainable real-estate bubble that the excess of savings also produced. And sure enough, that's exactly what happened.

When politicians see a problem, especially one on this scale, they feel obliged to regulate it. But so far, they've been unable to make headway. This is mainly because the surplus nations are jealous defenders of their essentially mercantilist economic models. Exporting to the deficit nations has served them well, and they are reluctant to change.

Ironically, one effect of the policies adopted to fight the downturn has been to reinforce the imbalances. Fiscal and monetary stimulus in the US is sucking in imports at near-record levels. The fresh dose of quantitative easing announced this week by the Federal Reserve will only turn up the heat further.

What can be done? China won't accept the currency appreciation that might, in time, reduce the imbalances, for that would undermine the competitiveness of its export industries. In any case, it probably wouldn't do the trick: surplus nations have a habit of maintaining competitiveness even in the face of an appreciating currency.

Unable to tackle the problem through currency reform, the US has turned instead to the idea of measures to limit the imbalances directly, through monitoring nations' current accounts. This has already gained some traction with the G20, which has agreed to assess the proposal ahead of the meeting in Seoul. As a way of defusing hot-headed calls in the US for the imposition of import tariffs, the idea is very much to be welcomed, as a trade war would be a disaster for all concerned. China, for one, has embraced the concept with evident relief.

Unfortunately, the limits as proposed would be highly unlikely to solve the underlying problem. Similar rules have failed hopelessly to maintain fiscal discipline in the eurozone. What chance for a global equivalent on trade? With or without sanctions, the limits would be manipulated to death. And even if they weren't, the proposed 4 per cent cap on surpluses and deficits would only marginally affect the worst offenders: for a big economy, a trade gap of 4 per cent of GDP is still a massive number, easily capable of creating unsafe flows of surplus savings.

No, globally imposed regulation, even if it could rise above lowest-common-denominator impotence, is unlikely to solve the problem, although it might possibly stop it getting significantly worse. But what would certainly fix things would be the dollar's demise as the global reserve currency of choice.

As we now know, dollar hegemony was itself a major cause of both the imbalances and the crisis, for it allowed more or less unbounded borrowing by the US from the rest of the world, at very favourable rates. As long as the US remained far and away the world's dominant economy, a global system based on the dollar still made some sense. But America has squandered this advantage on credit-fuelled spending; with the developing world expected to represent more than half of the global economy within five years, dollar hegemony no longer makes any sense.

The rest of the world is now openly questioning the merits of a global currency whose value is governed by America's perceived domestic needs, while the growth that once underpinned confidence in its ability to repay its debts has never looked more fragile.

Already, there are calls for alternatives. Unwilling to wait for one, the world's central banks are beginning to diversify their currency reserves. This, in turn, will eventually exert its own form of market discipline on the US, whose ability to soak the rest of the world by issuing ever more greenbacks will be correspondingly harmed.

These are seismic changes, of a type not seen for a generation or more. I hate to end with a cliché, but we do indeed live in interesting times.

Thursday, August 12, 2010

Tuesday, December 15, 2009

we rescue foreclosure victims


"
We are promoting our services to help foreclosure victims.
In these difficult economic times with the loss of jobs, banks folding, and with foreclosures at an all time high, it has been very difficult for the masses. I along with my legal team have a system in place that 1.)allows foreclosure victims more time in their homes by stopping foreclosure process and this keeps their privacy and dignity intact 2.)we also will restructure property owners mortgage;Our system works in all 50 states.If you would like to schedule an appointment or for more information or how to save your home,please call.




T.Lee Muhammad
HIP Harambee Inc,
Direct:317.496.0999
www.twitter.com/ForeclosureHero
Email: hipharambee.inc@gmail.com
"We Buy Homeowners/Foreclosure victims Time"


GLOBAL HOOD TV

Watch live streaming video from defendhaiti at livestream.com