Who Owns Your House ?

[Kosherboy]

http://centrepointnews.com/?p=1825

Eminent Domain and our future Chinese masters

By the Editor-in-Chief

The blogosphere is alive today with talk and rumour about the Obama Administration"™s alleged deal allowing the Red Chinese to secure their loans to the United States with eminent domain rights.

Under the provisions of the deal reported by both the DC Republican Examiner"™s Bill Dupray and radio host Hal Turner, the Obama Administration has given the Chinese a blank check to seize American property as collateral if the U. S. defaults on its loans from the Chinese.

[These two reports can be found at these links. Bill Dupray at: http://www.examiner.com/x-2304-DC-Republican-Examiner~y2009m2d27-Impeachment-Time--Obama-Grants-Eminent-Domain-Rights-to-China-to-Secure-Debt

Hal Turner's report is found at: http://www.halturnershow.blogspot.com/2009/02/feds-grant-eminent-domain-as-collateral.html]

Both of these writers are indignant at what appears to be not simply carte blanche access to American territory, they"™re angry that this deal, if authentic, is all but a complete surrender of U. S. sovereignty to the communist nation.

Hal Turner"™s report is based on a February 11 Bloomberg story. The Bloomberg article written by Belinda Cao and Judy Chen reports former Chinese central bank head Yu Yongding as saying that the Chinese need security for the major stimulus package and spending bill loans.

The U. S. he says, "™should make the Chinese feel confident that the value of the assets at least will not be eroded in a significant way."™

Cao and Chen point out that Yu is not saying what assurances the Chinese should seek to secure the major loans.

[This article can be found here: http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601009&sid=a_dsDz145J_A]

But are these reports real? Has the Obama Administration given the Chinese the authority to walk in and take over the country?

It"™s hard to tell based on recent statements made by both Chinese Foreign Minister Yang Jiechi and U. S. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton. In his welcome to Secretary Clinton, Foreign Minister Yang said, "™The two sides discussed the ongoing international financial crisis and agreed that, as the crisis is still unfolding and spreading, China and the United States should enhance coordination on macro- economic, and financial policies, jointly work for positive outcomes at the G-20 London financial summit, and reject trade and investment protectionism."™
"˜The two sides agreed that China and the United States should intensify exchanges in cooperation in economy and trade, law enforcement, science, education, culture, health, and other fields, continue to conduct counter-terrorism and non-proliferation consultations, and military-to-military exchanges, and continue to hold human rights dialogues on the basis of equality and mutual respect."™
Whether there"™s an eminent domain deal depends on what he means by, "˜"¦enhance coordination on macro-economic and financial policies, jointly work for positive outcomes at the G-20 London financial summit"¦"™
In response, Secretary Clinton said, "™The foreign minister and I had a wide-ranging discussion that started from a simple premise: it is essential that the United States and China have a positive, cooperative relationship. Both of us are seeking ways to deepen and broaden that relationship, so we discussed matters of bilateral concern. But we also spent a great deal of time on the array of global problems that China and the United States face together, and that we can work together to solve."™


"˜This is not just desirable for our two countries. It is important for the global community, which is counting on China and the United States to collaborate, to pursue security, peace, and prosperity for all."™

Clinton added that, "˜There is an acute and immediate need for this kind of collaboration in three key areas. First, the global economic crisis that hit us first and hit us deeply, and has also hit China. We have to look inward for solutions, but we must also look to each other to take a leadership role in designing and implementing a coordinated global response to stabilize the world"™s economy, and begin recovery."™

Whether such a deal exists depends on what Secretary Clinton means by, "˜There is an acute and immediate need for this kind of collaboration"¦"™

What type of collaboration does she mean?

Political commentator Mark Taylor says that because of Obama"™s radical politics, Obama will deliberately try to undermine the country. He added that it"™s not a surprise that the nation to whom we could surrender control is a communist country.

Posted under News

[ipscshooter]

If he does that, he deserves the most severe punishment allowed for treason...

[Fieldmouse]

Navy Federal Credit Union.

[burniegoeasily]

That is flat out scary chit.

[etothepii]

Not quite sure I trust your sources. They put comments in quotes, but don't say who they are quoting. The one is pretty much a blog.

[burniegoeasily]

I have not looked at it very closely eto. I hope you are right. If this is not true, which I hope it is not, I wonder what collateral we are putting upfor thisdebt to China?

[F3d]

http://www.snopes.com/politics/business/domain.asp

[Lemaitre]

This story is completely bogus. It is true that the U.S. Government will have to borrow a lot of money from China and ***an but it will do so by selling them Treasury Bonds which are denominated in U. S. dollars. These bonds are backed by the full faith and credit of the United States and require no tangible collateral. If a $1,000 bond comes due all the U.S. Government has to do is print a $1,000 in U.S. currency and the bond is redeemed. In the private sector, lenders often demand that borrowers put up tangible assets as security because they worry the borrower will not have the cash to pay the debt when it comes due. Since the U.S. Government can print money it will always have enough cash to repay any debt. Now a Chinese lender may be unhappy with this situation because they might fear that if the U.S. Government prints too much currency the value of the dollar will fall relative to other currencies and thus have less purchasing power. The way they deal with this is not by asking for tangible assets to be put up as collateral but by demanding a higher rate of interest on the bond to compensate them for the risk that they will be repaid in devalued dollars.

Furthermore, I doubt the Bank of China wants to own a house in Cleveland or Biloxi, they want liquid assets such as money for the repayment of debts. Finally, why would the Chinese or anybody else accept as collateral U.S. real estate, an asset class that has been dropping like a rock in value and according to most economists still has another 10% to 20% to fall before there is any hope of it stabilizing.