Hmmm hmmm hm hmmm hm hmmm… oh, sorry. I was just humming my theme song: Someday My Prince, er, Price Will Come.

I can certainly sympathize with Cinderella these days. You see, as an investor my m.o. is to try to find opportunities that will yield at least satisfactory investment results. The problem is that I’m living in the house of my wicked step-mother, Alan Greenspan, who has raised my two evil step-sisters, the stock market bubble and the real estate bubble. These two bubbles have been preventing me from being with my price charming, the price at which long-term returns will be satisfactory.

Most people believe that Anastasia, the stock market bubble, has already popped. She hasn’t. Take a gander at “Descending Everest” for the evidence.

And many more people believe that Drizella, the real estate bubble, is pretty much harmless. She’s not. Check out “Hubba Bubba” and “Frothing at the Mouth” if you don’t believe me.

So what’s a girl, er, investor in my situation to do?

Do I give in to Anastasia and Drizella and buy into the bubbles and hope for the best?

No, I’ve been to the ball. I’ve danced with the price. I know how attractive it is. I want to live happily ever after… But how?

Hang on to that glass slipper, that’s how. The only way my price charming will know me is by the cash I carry, my glass slipper. Anastasia and Drizella want to take that cash and foil my attempt to be with the price but I won’t let them. I can’t let them. Not if I want to live happily ever after.

I must have faith that the price will come for me someday. Until that day, I’ll just have to protect my slipper and wait.

Hmmm hmmm hm hmmm hm hmmm…
LIV

Hmmm hmmm hm hmmm hm hmmm… oh, sorry. I was just humming my theme song: Someday My Prince, er, Price Will Come.

I can certainly sympathize with Cinderella these days. You see, as an investor my m.o. is to try to find opportunities that will yield at least satisfactory investment results. The problem is that I’m living in the house of my wicked step-mother, Alan Greenspan, who has raised my two evil step-sisters, the stock market bubble and the real estate bubble. These two bubbles have been preventing me from being with my price charming, the price at which long-term returns will be satisfactory.

Most people believe that Anastasia, the stock market bubble, has already popped. She hasn’t. Take a gander at “Descending Everest” for the evidence.

And many more people believe that Drizella, the real estate bubble, is pretty much harmless. She’s not. Check out “Hubba Bubba” and “Frothing at the Mouth” if you don’t believe me.

So what’s a girl, er, investor in my situation to do?

Do I give in to Anastasia and Drizella and buy into the bubbles and hope for the best?

No, I’ve been to the ball. I’ve danced with the price. I know how attractive it is. I want to live happily ever after… But how?

Hang on to that glass slipper, that’s how. The only way my price charming will know me is by the cash I carry, my glass slipper. Anastasia and Drizella want to take that cash and foil my attempt to be with the price but I won’t let them. I can’t let them. Not if I want to live happily ever after.

I must have faith that the price will come for me someday. Until that day, I’ll just have to protect my slipper and wait.

Hmmm hmmm hm hmmm hm hmmm…
LIV

It is fascinating to witness. At the very same time that investment titans like John Templeton, Warren Buffett and Julian Robertson, along with the world’s most respected economists like Paul Volcker and Robert Rubin are warning that risks to the financial markets and economy are the greatest they’ve ever seen, the markets are whistling a completely different tune.

The chart below is a picture of the Nasdaq Volatility Index, or VXN. These volatility indexes are frequently referred to as “fear gauges” because they represent how much protection, via put options, is being purchased by investors. A high reading means investors are increasingly protecting their portfolios. A low reading, conversely, means investors feel confident with less protection.

Despite the warnings by the heavy-weights listed above and detailed in “A Hard Rain’s A-Gonna Fall,” the VXN recently hit an all-time low. In other words, investor fear has hit an all-time low. Complacency reigns.

Another interesting visual representation of investor sentiment is the ratio of the S&P 100, the 100 largest stocks in the market, to its volatility index, the VIX.

As you can see from the chart, this ratio has just recently surpassed its last peak in mid-2000. Investor optimism is even greater today than during the largest stock-market mania of all time. If I didn’t see it with my own eyes I wouldn’t believe it.

With the epic dichotomy between the opinions of the world’s true financial sages and the message of the markets someone’s going to be epicly wrong. While individuals are prone to mistakes, it is hard for me to believe that all of these highly-successful pundits are wrong. Are the markets, then, whistling past the graveyard? I’m sure we’ll find out.
LIV

It is fascinating to witness. At the very same time that investment titans like John Templeton, Warren Buffett and Julian Robertson, along with the world’s most respected economists like Paul Volcker and Robert Rubin are warning that risks to the financial markets and economy are the greatest they’ve ever seen, the markets are whistling a completely different tune.

The chart below is a picture of the Nasdaq Volatility Index, or VXN. These volatility indexes are frequently referred to as “fear gauges” because they represent how much protection, via put options, is being purchased by investors. A high reading means investors are increasingly protecting their portfolios. A low reading, conversely, means investors feel confident with less protection.

Despite the warnings by the heavy-weights listed above and detailed in “A Hard Rain’s A-Gonna Fall,” the VXN recently hit an all-time low. In other words, investor fear has hit an all-time low. Complacency reigns.

Another interesting visual representation of investor sentiment is the ratio of the S&P 100, the 100 largest stocks in the market, to its volatility index, the VIX.

As you can see from the chart, this ratio has just recently surpassed its last peak in mid-2000. Investor optimism is even greater today than during the largest stock-market mania of all time. If I didn’t see it with my own eyes I wouldn’t believe it.

With the epic dichotomy between the opinions of the world’s true financial sages and the message of the markets someone’s going to be epicly wrong. While individuals are prone to mistakes, it is hard for me to believe that all of these highly-successful pundits are wrong. Are the markets, then, whistling past the graveyard? I’m sure we’ll find out.
LIV

An enlightening article, titled “In Come The Waves,” from the most recent issue of The Economist declares that the global real estate bubble is the largest financial bubble in history, not just in nominal terms, of course, but in relative terms.

“According to estimates by The Economist, the total value of residential property in developed economies rose by more than $30 trillion over the past five years, to over $70 trillion, an increase equivalent to 100% of those countries’ combined GDPs. Not only does this dwarf any previous house-price boom, it is larger than the global stockmarket bubble in the late 1990s (an increase over five years of 80% of GDP) or America’s stockmarket bubble in the late 1920s (55% of GDP). In other words, it looks like the biggest bubble in history.”

Wow…

It goes without saying, then, that house prices are more overvalued than at any other previous peak in the real estate market. I’ll say it anyway: “Calculations by The Economist show that house prices have hit record levels in relation to rents in America, Britain, Australia, New Zealand, France, Spain, the Netherlands, Ireland and Belgium. This suggests that homes are even more over-valued than at previous peaks, from which prices typically fell in real terms.”

Simply breathtaking – but that’s not all. The article does a great job at debunking a few of the main arguments put forth by real estate bulls that attempt to show that, “it’s different this time.”

The main argument I’ve heard bulls propound is, “there just isn’t enough supply of houses to meet demand.” My response has usually been, “look at Japan, the the definition of limited supply: an island. Real estate prices there have gone down every year for over a decade.”

The article does one better by reporting that, “Economists at Goldman Sachs point out that residential investment is at a 40-year high in America, yet the number of households is growing at its slowest pace for 40 years. This will create excess supply.”

So supply is being created at a rate faster than any time in the past 40 years. The demographic stimulus for demand is the slowest it has been in the past 40 years. If that doesn’t convince the bulls that the lack of supply argument is flat out wrong I don’t know what will.

Another argument put forth by bulls is that, “interest rates are so low right now. Prices won’t stop going up until interest rates rise.” I’ve already argued otherwise in “Eminence Front,” however The Economist trumps me once again reporting, “The lesson from recent experience in Australia, Britain and the Netherlands [where bubbles have already begun deflating] is that, contrary to conventional wisdom, a big rise in interest rates is not necessary to make house prices falter.”

In fact, one very likely cause of future problems in real estate here in America is the prevalence of alternative mortgage products like ARMs, interest-only and negative amortization loans. These loans are so prevalent in hot markets that San Diego Union Tribune reports, “82.4 percent of San Diego County buyers in May chose adjustable-rate mortgages, about double the rate five years ago.”

This actually makes sense. Since only 10% of home buyers in San Diego county, using convential financing, can afford the median-priced home in the area, they are forced to use such risky loans. That is, if they feel they must buy.

The problem with these loans is that after the teaser-period of the loan expires, the rate jumps up and can very well double the payment of loan. So the people that are now stretching to make that $1,500 payment on their half-million-dollar home will all of a sudden find themselves in over their heads.

The New York Times reported this week that, “This year, only about $80 billion, or 1 percent, of mortgage debt will switch to an adjustable rate based largely on prevailing interest rates, according to an analysis by Deutsche Bank in New York. Next year, some $300 billion of mortgage debt will be similarly adjusted. But in 2007, the portion will soar, with $1 trillion of the nation’s mortgage debt – or about 12 percent of it – switching to adjustable payments, according to the analysis. The 2007 adjustments will almost certainly be the largest such turnover that has ever occurred.”

This is where the largest financial bubble in the history of the world meets the largest consumer credit crunch in the history of the world. And all the bankers and real estate speculators, responsible for blowing up the largest bubble in history, will find themselves with gum all over their faces.
LIV

An enlightening article, titled “In Come The Waves,” from the most recent issue of The Economist declares that the global real estate bubble is the largest financial bubble in history, not just in nominal terms, of course, but in relative terms.

“According to estimates by The Economist, the total value of residential property in developed economies rose by more than $30 trillion over the past five years, to over $70 trillion, an increase equivalent to 100% of those countries’ combined GDPs. Not only does this dwarf any previous house-price boom, it is larger than the global stockmarket bubble in the late 1990s (an increase over five years of 80% of GDP) or America’s stockmarket bubble in the late 1920s (55% of GDP). In other words, it looks like the biggest bubble in history.”

Wow…

It goes without saying, then, that house prices are more overvalued than at any other previous peak in the real estate market. I’ll say it anyway: “Calculations by The Economist show that house prices have hit record levels in relation to rents in America, Britain, Australia, New Zealand, France, Spain, the Netherlands, Ireland and Belgium. This suggests that homes are even more over-valued than at previous peaks, from which prices typically fell in real terms.”

Simply breathtaking – but that’s not all. The article does a great job at debunking a few of the main arguments put forth by real estate bulls that attempt to show that, “it’s different this time.”

The main argument I’ve heard bulls propound is, “there just isn’t enough supply of houses to meet demand.” My response has usually been, “look at Japan, the the definition of limited supply: an island. Real estate prices there have gone down every year for over a decade.”

The article does one better by reporting that, “Economists at Goldman Sachs point out that residential investment is at a 40-year high in America, yet the number of households is growing at its slowest pace for 40 years. This will create excess supply.”

So supply is being created at a rate faster than any time in the past 40 years. The demographic stimulus for demand is the slowest it has been in the past 40 years. If that doesn’t convince the bulls that the lack of supply argument is flat out wrong I don’t know what will.

Another argument put forth by bulls is that, “interest rates are so low right now. Prices won’t stop going up until interest rates rise.” I’ve already argued otherwise in “Eminence Front,” however The Economist trumps me once again reporting, “The lesson from recent experience in Australia, Britain and the Netherlands [where bubbles have already begun deflating] is that, contrary to conventional wisdom, a big rise in interest rates is not necessary to make house prices falter.”

In fact, one very likely cause of future problems in real estate here in America is the prevalence of alternative mortgage products like ARMs, interest-only and negative amortization loans. These loans are so prevalent in hot markets that San Diego Union Tribune reports, “82.4 percent of San Diego County buyers in May chose adjustable-rate mortgages, about double the rate five years ago.”

This actually makes sense. Since only 10% of home buyers in San Diego county, using convential financing, can afford the median-priced home in the area, they are forced to use such risky loans. That is, if they feel they must buy.

The problem with these loans is that after the teaser-period of the loan expires, the rate jumps up and can very well double the payment of loan. So the people that are now stretching to make that $1,500 payment on their half-million-dollar home will all of a sudden find themselves in over their heads.

The New York Times reported this week that, “This year, only about $80 billion, or 1 percent, of mortgage debt will switch to an adjustable rate based largely on prevailing interest rates, according to an analysis by Deutsche Bank in New York. Next year, some $300 billion of mortgage debt will be similarly adjusted. But in 2007, the portion will soar, with $1 trillion of the nation’s mortgage debt – or about 12 percent of it – switching to adjustable payments, according to the analysis. The 2007 adjustments will almost certainly be the largest such turnover that has ever occurred.”

This is where the largest financial bubble in the history of the world meets the largest consumer credit crunch in the history of the world. And all the bankers and real estate speculators, responsible for blowing up the largest bubble in history, will find themselves with gum all over their faces.
LIV

The following essay was submitted to the Bulletin, the local Bend newspapaer, in response an article titled, “Economist: Area prices for homes unlikely to drop,” that ran in Saturday’s edition.

Last Saturday the Bulletin reported that, “Central Oregon’s housing market could cool off in coming years, but the region’s home prices aren’t part of a bubble, and they’re not going to burst, Oregon State Economist Tom Potiowsky said on Friday.”

I read Mr. Potiowsky’s comments with interest and was eager to understand the reasoning behind his assertions. Yet I couldn’t find a single fact or statistic in the article to support his view.

Former Mayor Oran Teater seemed to take up the challenge in suggesting that, “it used to be that when the state caught a cold, Bend caught pneumonia. I think because of our construction and our boom and our growth, we’re a bit insulated from the rest of the state.” In other words, because we’ve had a bigger boom than the rest of the state we should avoid a bust. Huh? What? Doesn’t it usually work the other way: the bigger they are the harder they fall?

The former Mayor’s line of thought sure sounds like the familiar, “it’s different this time,” mantra extolled by stock-market aficionados in 1999. He is essentially asking us to believe that, while the country’s “New Economy,” espoused during the height of the stock market bubble, was unmasked as a sad fallacy, maybe Bend has succeeded in developing its own “New Economy” that is immune to natural economic cycles. I don’t buy it.

In stark contrast to Mr. Potiowsky’s comments, I believe there is ample evidence to suggest that Bend real estate is experiencing a bubble. My calculations of local property prices versus rental incomes, a common measure of property investment value, suggest this ratio currently hovers in the high 20’s. This means that a home yielding rental income of $10,000 per year, for example, is selling for over $250,000 in Bend today.

Bend’s high 20’s ratio is significantly higher than the national average of 17.1 and even the national average, we should keep in mind, is up dramatically from the 11.6 level of only five years ago. Bend’s ratio is not just above average; it is roughly on par with the most overvalued areas in the nation. In fact, the only regions in the country with ratios similar to Bend’s are Southern California, South Florida, New York City, Boston and Las Vegas, areas even Federal Reserve Chairman Alan Greenspan concedes to be bubbles.

Another characteristic of asset bubbles that can be seen here in Bend is wide-spread speculation. People, driven by hope and greed, flock to rising asset prices. Just as people flocked to the stock market a few years ago, they are now flocking to real estate. The day-traders of 1999 are today’s real estate investors and it is happening here in Bend. Everyone knows at least one friend or neighbor that has leveraged their home into multiple investment properties. These speculators all seem confident about prices rising from here to eternity.

Research conducted by the International Monetary Fund, however, suggests otherwise. Their studies show that a sharp rise in house prices is more likely to be followed by a bust than is a stock-market boom. Perhaps the reason for this is that real estate, as is widely understood, is one of the most economically-sensitive sectors of the business world. As such, a real-estate-focused economy, such as Bend’s, would not escape catching “pneumonia” were the state to catch a cold. There is no “New Economy” for the country or for Bend.

Mr. Potiowsky, as a successful economist, knows this. And it might have even been on his mind when he recently told “Oregon Business” magazine a very different story than that which the Bulletin recently reported. “Oregon state economist Tom Potiowsky says the more he hears about speculative buying of property in places such as Bend and Ashland, the more concerned he becomes about the potential for a bubble-like deflation of housing prices,” reports the June issue. While Mr. Potiowsky is surely a capable economist, it seems he’s an even better politician.
LIV

The following essay was submitted to the Bulletin, the local Bend newspapaer, in response an article titled, “Economist: Area prices for homes unlikely to drop,” that ran in Saturday’s edition.

Last Saturday the Bulletin reported that, “Central Oregon’s housing market could cool off in coming years, but the region’s home prices aren’t part of a bubble, and they’re not going to burst, Oregon State Economist Tom Potiowsky said on Friday.”

I read Mr. Potiowsky’s comments with interest and was eager to understand the reasoning behind his assertions. Yet I couldn’t find a single fact or statistic in the article to support his view.

Former Mayor Oran Teater seemed to take up the challenge in suggesting that, “it used to be that when the state caught a cold, Bend caught pneumonia. I think because of our construction and our boom and our growth, we’re a bit insulated from the rest of the state.” In other words, because we’ve had a bigger boom than the rest of the state we should avoid a bust. Huh? What? Doesn’t it usually work the other way: the bigger they are the harder they fall?

The former Mayor’s line of thought sure sounds like the familiar, “it’s different this time,” mantra extolled by stock-market aficionados in 1999. He is essentially asking us to believe that, while the country’s “New Economy,” espoused during the height of the stock market bubble, was unmasked as a sad fallacy, maybe Bend has succeeded in developing its own “New Economy” that is immune to natural economic cycles. I don’t buy it.

In stark contrast to Mr. Potiowsky’s comments, I believe there is ample evidence to suggest that Bend real estate is experiencing a bubble. My calculations of local property prices versus rental incomes, a common measure of property investment value, suggest this ratio currently hovers in the high 20’s. This means that a home yielding rental income of $10,000 per year, for example, is selling for over $250,000 in Bend today.

Bend’s high 20’s ratio is significantly higher than the national average of 17.1 and even the national average, we should keep in mind, is up dramatically from the 11.6 level of only five years ago. Bend’s ratio is not just above average; it is roughly on par with the most overvalued areas in the nation. In fact, the only regions in the country with ratios similar to Bend’s are Southern California, South Florida, New York City, Boston and Las Vegas, areas even Federal Reserve Chairman Alan Greenspan concedes to be bubbles.

Another characteristic of asset bubbles that can be seen here in Bend is wide-spread speculation. People, driven by hope and greed, flock to rising asset prices. Just as people flocked to the stock market a few years ago, they are now flocking to real estate. The day-traders of 1999 are today’s real estate investors and it is happening here in Bend. Everyone knows at least one friend or neighbor that has leveraged their home into multiple investment properties. These speculators all seem confident about prices rising from here to eternity.

Research conducted by the International Monetary Fund, however, suggests otherwise. Their studies show that a sharp rise in house prices is more likely to be followed by a bust than is a stock-market boom. Perhaps the reason for this is that real estate, as is widely understood, is one of the most economically-sensitive sectors of the business world. As such, a real-estate-focused economy, such as Bend’s, would not escape catching “pneumonia” were the state to catch a cold. There is no “New Economy” for the country or for Bend.

Mr. Potiowsky, as a successful economist, knows this. And it might have even been on his mind when he recently told “Oregon Business” magazine a very different story than that which the Bulletin recently reported. “Oregon state economist Tom Potiowsky says the more he hears about speculative buying of property in places such as Bend and Ashland, the more concerned he becomes about the potential for a bubble-like deflation of housing prices,” reports the June issue. While Mr. Potiowsky is surely a capable economist, it seems he’s an even better politician.
LIV

Most people are already well aware of the fraud committed at the two largest mortgage operations in the world, Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac. The two companies effectively “cooked the books” to the tune of about $12 billion. That this hasn’t drawn more outrage and calls for intervention is simply amazing. What most people are less aware of, however, is the fraud that pervades the entire real estate industry.

Conflicts of interest in real estate are at least as great as they were between Enron and their complicit auditor Arthur Andersen or between Wall Street research analysts and their subjects/clients. Real estate agents have a duty to protect their clients. Mortgage loan originators and home appraisers have a duty to protect the bank’s investment. The problem is that their independence is compromised by the fact that they all have one common goal: generate as many property deals as humanly possible. Why? Because they thrive on commissions and fees. The more deals get done the more money they make. Period.

Recently, honest home appraisers have raised a red flag in railing against these incestuous relationships. Complaining that the real estate agents and mortgage brokers who control the transaction process have been coercing appraisers to commit appraisal fraud, over 8,000 appraisers have lobbied Washington to provide federal regulation to these highly unregulated businesses. The fact is more that half of all home appraisers admit that they have been pressured to inflate property valuations.

Legally inflating appraisals actually shouldn’t be too hard to do. Anyone who has bought or sold a home knows that appraisals are based on comparable home sales or “comps.” A home is effectively worth x because a similar home down the street sold for x. This is akin to saying Google is selling for 113-times-earnings so Yahoo!, at only 58-times-earnings, is undervalued by half! This is also the process by which real estate prices go up simply because they’re going up. So for appraisers to be even having difficulty justifying prices there must be some really aggressive realtors and mortgage brokers out there.

Indeed, so aggressive that the Mortgage Asset Research Institute, MARI, reports that California and Florida, perhaps the two hottest real estate markets in the country, are leading the growing epidemic of mortgage fraud. One would think that with so many appraisers pressured to commit appraisal fraud it would lead the way in overall mortgage fraud. But even considering its prevalence in today’s market, it trails, by a large margin, the greatest type of mortgage fraud: application fraud.

Application fraud is simply falsifying information on a mortgage loan application, presumably information that may be detrimental to obtaining the loan. If mortgage brokers and real estate agents are already coercing appraisers to commit fraud who could put appraisal fraud past them? William Matthews, vice president of MARI, calls this, “fraud for commission, where a professional such as the mortgage broker, banker, realty agent or appraiser changes documents in order to get a commission.” This type of fraud makes up at least 60% of the growing instances of mortgage fraud.

From top to bottom, from Fannie Mae to the initial mortgage application, fraud is helping inflate the real estate bubble. David Callahan, research director for the nonpartisan think tank Davos and author of the report, “Home Insecurity, How Widespread Appraisal Fraud Puts Homeowners at Risk,” puts the unsettling trend of mortgage fraud into perspective in saying, “This is just another area in American life where a boom, with all its money to be made, brought out the worst in us.” Sounds kind of familiar. Anybody remember Enron?
LIV

Most people are already well aware of the fraud committed at the two largest mortgage operations in the world, Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac. The two companies effectively “cooked the books” to the tune of about $12 billion. That this hasn’t drawn more outrage and calls for intervention is simply amazing. What most people are less aware of, however, is the fraud that pervades the entire real estate industry.

Conflicts of interest in real estate are at least as great as they were between Enron and their complicit auditor Arthur Andersen or between Wall Street research analysts and their subjects/clients. Real estate agents have a duty to protect their clients. Mortgage loan originators and home appraisers have a duty to protect the bank’s investment. The problem is that their independence is compromised by the fact that they all have one common goal: generate as many property deals as humanly possible. Why? Because they thrive on commissions and fees. The more deals get done the more money they make. Period.

Recently, honest home appraisers have raised a red flag in railing against these incestuous relationships. Complaining that the real estate agents and mortgage brokers who control the transaction process have been coercing appraisers to commit appraisal fraud, over 8,000 appraisers have lobbied Washington to provide federal regulation to these highly unregulated businesses. The fact is more that half of all home appraisers admit that they have been pressured to inflate property valuations.

Legally inflating appraisals actually shouldn’t be too hard to do. Anyone who has bought or sold a home knows that appraisals are based on comparable home sales or “comps.” A home is effectively worth x because a similar home down the street sold for x. This is akin to saying Google is selling for 113-times-earnings so Yahoo!, at only 58-times-earnings, is undervalued by half! This is also the process by which real estate prices go up simply because they’re going up. So for appraisers to be even having difficulty justifying prices there must be some really aggressive realtors and mortgage brokers out there.

Indeed, so aggressive that the Mortgage Asset Research Institute, MARI, reports that California and Florida, perhaps the two hottest real estate markets in the country, are leading the growing epidemic of mortgage fraud. One would think that with so many appraisers pressured to commit appraisal fraud it would lead the way in overall mortgage fraud. But even considering its prevalence in today’s market, it trails, by a large margin, the greatest type of mortgage fraud: application fraud.

Application fraud is simply falsifying information on a mortgage loan application, presumably information that may be detrimental to obtaining the loan. If mortgage brokers and real estate agents are already coercing appraisers to commit fraud who could put appraisal fraud past them? William Matthews, vice president of MARI, calls this, “fraud for commission, where a professional such as the mortgage broker, banker, realty agent or appraiser changes documents in order to get a commission.” This type of fraud makes up at least 60% of the growing instances of mortgage fraud.

From top to bottom, from Fannie Mae to the initial mortgage application, fraud is helping inflate the real estate bubble. David Callahan, research director for the nonpartisan think tank Davos and author of the report, “Home Insecurity, How Widespread Appraisal Fraud Puts Homeowners at Risk,” puts the unsettling trend of mortgage fraud into perspective in saying, “This is just another area in American life where a boom, with all its money to be made, brought out the worst in us.” Sounds kind of familiar. Anybody remember Enron?
LIV