Thread: Elevation; Investment Intelligence Corporation; dba Prophetmax Managed fx; Senen Pousa, Joel Friant, Michael Dillard

Regarding the W4V form, that is NOT what I was referring to. If you research on your own (since we cannot talk "politics" here), you will find that the so-called "income tax" is 100% VOLUNTARY. You give up that right when you fill out a W4 form, which you are NOT required to do.

The problem is that most employers BELIEVE they will get in trouble and therefore do not give the employees the option to opt out. This known as ignorance.

"Fruits of labor" was redefined along the way to "income" so it could be taxed. Look it up and draw your own conclusions.

Mark

Mark, you sound as if you do not pay taxes ;)

If you do, then why, if it is voluntary ?


PS: "voluntary" part is to allow an employer to deduct your tax and send it to IRS versus you paying tax yourself directly to IRS.
That is the only purpose of W4. And not a contract of some kind with IRS

Originally Posted by marsh56

I have been in the insurance business for over 35 years

I will put this on the table, I strongly believe in insurance. For me it makes sense to have a company share the risk against a catastrophic loss and an emergency fund to cover the small stuff. Something unfortunate will happen in almost every family be it illness, accident, lawsuit, destruction of a home, or death that can cause a total financial disaster. Being properly insured (IMO)might mean the difference between having a net worth to live on or not.

Recently you and a few others have said a few things with respect to me that were rather nice, I certainly appreciate that. What I enjoy about RealScam is there is no advertising. People are truly responsible for their own decisions when they leave these pages.

With that out of the way, I do have a few more thoughts on Dillard and what you are proposing that may not align with your thinking. Running from Wall Street to the arms of a life insurer might end up as bad as leaving a pimp for the comfort of a drug dealer. Fees aside, I am talking about 1 specific issue for now and that is one of proper funding. If you have been around since the 80s then you should KNOW what happened with the promises of Universal Life. As interest rates plunged, what happened to thousands of policy owners and the security they thought they had?

Yet here we are in 2014 with a virtually identical tale that might prove to be a nightmare for policy holders 30 years from now. That is but one issue I have with Dillard's EVG, so I may be here for a bit. I again hope you will participate as it makes a better discussion.

You are flat wrong on the W-4, I did look it up along with twenty other Tax Protester "revelations". Much like the "silver" bullet this kind of garbage is peddled to extract money from the people who can least afford to part with it. Buy my book, get my kit, become invisible, pay no tax. Where ever were we discussing something that sounded similar?

Originally Posted by marsh56

Is Paradigm a scam because they are associated with Dillard? Asked differently, why would they associate with Dillard if they thought he was a scammer?

Mark

For this response I consulted one of my pretend rich mentors who suggested that you read the EVG terms and conditions. She indicated that it is entirely possible that Dillard was COMPENSATED to refer business to vendors. Then she laughed a deep hearty cigar smokers laugh (the rich always smoke cigars when I make up stories about them) and said this cash was ON TOP of an already inflated membership cost.

Back to the real world...

One might ask why John Elway did speaking engagements for Wayde Mckelvy?? Elway was paid to speak by firm now probed by SEC - The Denver Post

Wayde was responsible for raising money for a $40,000,000 PONZI scheme. The Biggest Green Scam in America | 5280

Even though his guilt is without question, McKelvy remains as free as a bird. Here's why I bring this up, a few years back Wayde did seminars and wrote a "tell-all". In the book he spilled the 17 CLOSELY GUARDED SECRETS of the SUPER RICH. Chapter 2, wait for it.....

Moving at the Speed of Wealth McKelvy.JPG

RICH PEOPLE CREATE A PERSONAL BANKING SYSTEM USING A PROPERLY DESIGNED LIFE INSURANCE POLICY. I kid a bit, it is a good part of the intro too. When you get to chapter 4 you are told what a GREAT idea using your HOME EQUITY is to fund these super investments of the rich. As you can imagine since he was raising funds for a Ponzi scheme people got to lose twice.

Good read, Investor Alert - Betting the Ranch: Risking Your Home to Buy Securities - FINRA an awful lot of people would have you believe home equity is a bad thing.

Originally Posted by marsh56

Insurance companies who offer these plans are very difficult to find. Even harder is finding an agent who is knowledgeable and experienced in this specialized area.

Easy to find as unwanted relatives at the holidays. There are any number of selling systems that use life insurance in the manner Dillard is telling members is a secret of the rich. They all have books and a hook. If this was meant to be a secret, people won't be needing to occupy Wall Street much longer.


MISSED FORTUNE
Amazon.com: Missed Fortune: Dispel the Money Myth-Conceptions--Isn't It Time You Became Wealthy? eBook: Douglas R. Andrew: Kindle Store

BANK ON YOURSELF
http://www.amazon.com/Bank-Yourself-...nk+on+yourself

BECOMING YOUR OWN BANKER.
http://www.amazon.com/Becoming-Your-...pr_product_top

CIRCLE OF WEALTH
Amazon.com: Customer Reviews: Your Circle of Wealth

Dillard charges to join EVG and then best I can tell refers members to his "rolodex" to buy stuff. ZERO reason to believe he is doing this for free. When he found that great Forex trading opportunity he saw fit to collect $750,000 in commissions for bringing in his member's money. He could have said "keep it in for my flock", "they have already paid my fee", Dillard chose "More for Mike".

If someone wants to use life insurance in this manner, it is meant to be a multi-year commitment. Fees matter, company strength matters, the agents qualifications, and experience matter. Is Dillard really doing due diligence on the vendors, or is he operating more like a cyber-billboard and whoever greases his palm gets the nod?

Originally Posted by marsh56

I said "some" of you. Can you not read? It was just a jest. Lighten up, my friend.

It seems YOU might have a lot of time in order to count sentences.

Life is full of irony.

Mark

Six sentences responding to three with the irony being that you apparently use less words than others and criticise them for using too many.

Originally Posted by marsh56

Wow. Some of you appear to have a lot of time on your hands. Must be nice!

Nearly as nice as you replying to such with even lengthier replies then the ones you criticise for being too long.

Following are a couple points of clarification. First, the "trading" to which I am referring is FOREX. Before I choose a managed account option, I always insist on having read only access to a live account. Unless that option is available, I go no further.

So what to trade foreign exchange all you need do is buy one currency and sell another. How does being licenced change that?

If you look hard enough, you can find traders who average 2-8% per month. For the most part, these guys do not advertise and minimums can be quite high.

So can you name ten of them? Also 8% a month is 96% a year. Canb ou name even TWO traders with this level of results?

Since FOREX is still pretty much the "wild west", scams far outweigh the legitimate programs in my experience. Just because there may not be independent audits does not mean that returns like these are not possible. Caveat emptor is the rule.

Foreign exchange to my knowledge isnt wild west but established.

The saying, "If it sounds too good to be true, it probably is" is NOT always TRUE! It is more of a mindset.

Please look up the word "probably" There is no mindset about the definition of probably.

If a person is close minded to certain concepts, then the legitimate opportunities will never present themselves.

If your mind is closed use a dictionary. probably means in most cases.

Regarding Warren Buffett, did you know that a division of Berkshire Hathaway purchases life insurance contracts, also known as "life settlements"? In the US, the Supreme Court in 1911 determined that permanent life insurance contracts are an asset. Therefore, they can be bought, sold, traded and bartered just like any other asset.

So what?

A scenario goes like this: a person is 80 years old and is sickly but not terminal. She has a permanent death benefit of $2M and cash surrender value of, say, $200k. She wants money NOW. According to the contract, there are only two options. One is to surrender the policy and get a check for the $200k. However, the death benefit would disappear.

The other option is to borrow against the cash value. The good news is the money does not have to be paid back. Only simple interest is due annually and can be added to the loan as well if it will not cause the policy to lapse. Of course, the death benefit would be reduced by any outstanding loan amount plus interest.

Enter a THIRD option, not that well known, called the Life Settlement. In this case, the policyholder is offered an amount HIGHER than the current cash value paid to her TODAY and in CASH. In turn, she turns ownership over to the company purchasing the contract. It now becomes both the owner and the beneficiary.

In which case the death benefit would disappear same as option ONE.

The company now has a GUARANTEED equity position. The only "risk" is that the company is now responsible for the monthly premiums. If she outlives her life expectancy, the company's overall return would be less. However, the contracts that are purchased are based on actuarial determinations and life expectancy tends to be very accurate.

Guess who purchases many of these contracts other than Buffett? That's right, banks, large equity firms and hedge funds. Almost all of them keep the profits to themselves and that is their right.

However, there are some companies who purchase the contracts and then make them available for retail "participants". Notice I did not say "investors". According to the SEC, these "fractional life settlements" are an "alternative investment" under Regulation D. There are companies out there that guarantee a return of 11-16% BY CONTRACT, AT MATURITY. Due to the regulation, this cannot be quoted as an "annual rate of return" because the TOTAL is paid out at maturity, that is when the person dies. That number is the one and only variable in the equation.

For example, if someone participates with $10k and the life expectancy is 48 months, then the participant receives 44% if the person dies ANY time up to and including the 48 months. The risk is as follows: if the person lives longer, the participants must pay THEIR portion of the monthly premium until death occurs. This amount is paid out of pocket and would reduce the overall return. This seldom happens but must be disclosed up front.

Another reason this "alternative investment" is not well known is because it cannot be advertised to the general public. Interesting and ironic. The SEC also says you have to be an "accredited INVESTOR" to participate even though it is NOT an investment. Interesting again.

And guess what? A google search will quickly find "SCAM" written all over this industry. Does that mean that ALL companies in the business are scams? Of course not. Once again, the individual must do his own due diligence.

One company has a 20-year track record with many satisfied clients. Another was a clear Ponzi. Again, painting with a broad brush can close the door to legitimate opportunities before it is even opened.

So there you go. Further proof that double digit returns ARE indeed possible if you know where to look. In this case, the returns are OUTSIDE of the market as well. No sleepless nights wondering when the markets will correct or crash.

Assuming this alternative market in life insurance/assurance is legit,care to name THREE people who have get the returns out of it that you claim?

There, I had some time today to educate. You guys obviously ignored my post that stated I have a life insurance contract that credits a GUARANTEE of 4% annually and currently pays 6% with dividends. I found the company with the help of Dillard's Rolodex. For the record, the company is Paradigm Life. Insurance companies who offer these plans are very difficult to find. Even harder is finding an agent who is knowledgeable and experienced in this specialized area.

Is Paradigm a scam because they are associated with Dillard? Asked differently, why would they associate with Dillard if they thought he was a scammer?

So you are saying they support and can endorse him? So who in that company supports him or stands behind a statement supporting him?

"If you look hard enough, you can find traders who average 2-8% per month. For the most part, these guys do not advertise and minimums can be quite high."

Maybe a handful, but they work on Wall Street and handle billions.
8% a year would be a solid forex trader.

As an aside, this marsh56 character MUST think CAPITAL letters makes him less of a crackpot.

He should go ALL IN on the schemes this shyster hawks.. TEACH us a LESSON on HERE.

Seems like a whole lotta words just to say you want to have dillard's babies.

Originally Posted by NikSam

Mark, you sound as if you do not pay taxes ;)

If you do, then why, if it is voluntary ?


PS: "voluntary" part is to allow an employer to deduct your tax and send it to IRS versus you paying tax yourself directly to IRS.
That is the only purpose of W4. And not a contract of some kind with IRS

He's just spouting nonsense, NikSam.

It seems to me that he's parroting rubbish that probably came from a libertarian nutjob or sociopathic scammer who's trying to sell something.

The sad thing is that some people will believe anything, no matter how ridiculous or illogical it is.

Originally Posted by marsh56

So PPBlog, is Social Security NOT a legal Ponzi? Where does the money come from except from other participants?

It is a red herring. Just suppose it IS a legal ponzi? So what? We are discussing ponzis that are ILLEGAL! You seem to be full of "whataboutery" ! You know? "what about..." and then off on another red herring. If we were discussing a State where rape abortion or the death penalty is not legal it is no use saying "What about SaudiArabia/China/Italy or somewhere else where it is legal ( in Italy by the way the legal age of consent is 12 or 14 or does not even exist in law so a similar act in say the Us or UK would be classed rape).
Now having said that the law in saudi arabia or china or Italy may be an interesting discussion but THIS DISCUSSION is not about the jurisprudence of systems. In other woirds even if legal ponzis exist and the discussion of how they came to be might be interesting this is NOT what we are discussion. We are discussing ILLEGAL ones. Trying to justify them on the basis of whataboutery is a red herring.

Also, you do know that the Federal Reserve Bank is not "federal", has no money in "reserve" and is not a "bank", correct? It is a private corporation. It was never intended to have the power it has today to have fiat currency printed with impunity. Think "fear and greed" and "controlling the masses".

Did you know the Holy roman Empire was not an Empire and not Roman and certainly was not Holy? Again so what? We are not discussing off topic red herrings we are discussing illegal scams.

The IRS was supposed to be "temporary". What happened? Where does it say that the Founding Fathers ever considered a tax on a person's "fruit of his labor"? Congress and the IRS decided to redefine "income" in order to institute an "income tax". Did you know that to this day, applying to pay "income tax" (W-4 form) is "voluntary"? That wording USED TO BE on the actual form. Conveniently it has now disappeared. To my knowledge, the IRS code has not changed, just the form.

The jurisprudence of taxation and the idea of "tax is slavery" is another off topic red herring but feel free to discuss any of these in the "conspiracy theory " forum where I will clearly point you to the founding fathers ideas regarding how representatives of congress were to decide on and impose and regulate taxation.

In other words, once you agree to be a "taxpayer", you then give the government the right to tax your income. Study the actual code. I did.

It isn't a case of individuals agreeing. You can't just decide what laws you want to ignore. Well you can but then you would be breaking them. anyway that also is best dealt with in a different thread.

These references are not all "conspiracy theories" and merit some amount of reasonable discussion. It is amazing that the vast amount of any population chooses to just accept things and follow the status quo. There is a saying that if the blind leads the blind, they BOTH fall in the ditch!

Once again, painting with a broad brush often hides the truth. Why not keep an open mind and educate oneself?

I could not agree with you more. and having an anti authoritarian beliefs I'm happy to discuss these issues and educatte you about them in the "conspiracy theory" forum. Feel free to start a thread there. But THIS DISCUSSIN+ON is not a meta discussion about such systems it is about scam systems and poonzis being dealt with in court. In fact I lifted the thread title from a court document. If you want to discuss whether the constitution or court is a legal institution do that elsewhere. But please confine yourself here to dealing with actual facts about the so called "enterprise" and people involved and not about opinions on the system of dealing with them.

Thanks for all the replies. I still appreciate Ribshaw's the most because he is reasonable and fair. That makes for good debate. The rest of you seem to have your minds made up already. Not much to debate there.

I continue to be accused of going off topic even though I did not introduce any of the side topics. Therefore I will no longer reply in kind. It is difficult to debate when one side is allowed to bring in side topics. Honestly I do not see that any of us have strayed too far. But that is just my opinion.

Back to Dillard. Most of you here believe he is a scammer. So be it. I have personally benefited from information found within my membership. I then took that information, added it to my financial services practice and now can help others as well.

Of course Dillard is compensated by his Rolodex vendors. I would expect nothing less.

If anyone here believes that all vendors in that program are misguided, I would be interested in actual proof vs. guilt by association.

By the way, I occasionally put a word in ALL CAPS to EMPHASIZE a point. The written word has limits and I don't care to use bold. It's a simple choice. Amazing that it offends some people.

Mark

Secret of the Rich #18:

The rich don't sign a contract to get secrets that only the rich know, only to be told that they will need to confirm said secrets with real professionals who actually understand the law, math, and finance.

Elevation Group Disclaimer.jpg

Secret of the Rich # Green:

Charge the **** out of people's credit cards, everyone pays to ride the bus.

Elevation Group Disclaimer1.jpg

Secret of the Rich Operation Silent Mouse:

Take a page from the world's great dictators, free speech turns little people into big people and must be crushed at all costs. Contractually Speaking.

No Free Speech.jpg

https://theelevationgroup.com/legal/terms/

https://theelevationgroup.com/legal/disclaimer/

I was wrong about this being 1000s of policies, according to the WSJ it is millions. My bad...

While some of today's policies are structured somewhat differently, the problem with policy loans, lower than projected returns, and/or higher than projected expenses yields the same result. At the risk of repeating myself, is Dillard putting clients in front of the right professionals?



CEDAR RAPIDS, Iowa—About 20 years ago, Steven and Joanne Carfrae, then-owners of a meat-packing plant here, took out a "universal life" insurance policy, naming local charities to receive the future $2 million in proceeds.

To their dismay, the couple recently faced a stark choice: put up tens of thousands of dollars to keep the policy alive at its existing face value or reduce the death benefit sharply. They went the latter route and now have a $658,000 policy—meaning their favorite causes will receive $1.3 million less than planned.
Enlarge Image

Steven and Joanne Carfrae with their grandchild Stephen Allen for The Wall Street Journal

Millions of Americans, who fueled a boom in such policies in the 1980s and 1990s, are in similar situations.

The culprit is years of low interest rates, though the cumulative effect is just now being felt for many policyholders and the charities, schools and other nonprofits that many buyers designated to receive the proceeds. The charitable focus of many buyers means the impact is being felt across entire communities, like here in Cedar Rapids, and not just within individual households.

While the problem has been brewing for years, many policies are reaching a crisis stage, according to financial advisers, insurance brokers and charitable-giving officials nationally.

"Many of these policies are lying in drawers and lockboxes, and people don't even know there is a problem" because they didn't fully understand how the contracts worked, said Loren Coppock, chairman of insurance and financial strategies firm TrueNorth Cos. in Cedar Rapids. "Most of these policies will expire worthless unless big steps are taken now."

These policies combine a tax-deferred, interest-paying savings compartment—typically called a cash-value account—with a death benefit. Owners put money into the account, and the insurer pays interest. The interest rate can vary over the years, but there is a guaranteed minimum. Insurers deduct the death benefit's annual cost, which typically increases each year to reflect the owner's aging.

In the high-interest-rate years, the universal-life pitch was that owners could use the power of compounded interest to build up enough money in the cash-value account to pay some, or even all, of the rising insurance costs as they aged.

But with interest income far short of expectations, owners have to kick in more money to cover the annual insurance charges—or reduce the death benefit to lower the expense.

Thanks to their good health, the Carfraes, in their early 60s, were able to get a good deal on a new policy and use the cash value in their old policy to fund it. Still, Mr. Carfrae said he and his wife were "very disappointed" that they had to shrink the amounts they are giving to a church, hospital, theater, high school and other causes.

Buyers of universal life include many doctors, small-business owners and others who have maxed out their tax-advantaged 401(k) and other savings programs. Households of more-modest incomes typically buy bare-bones term-life insurance.

In the mid to late 1980s, universal-life policies generated at least a quarter of all individual life-insurance premiums, according to industry group Limra. Ten-year Treasurys hit 15% in the 1980s and declined over time to now yield less than 3%, due to the Federal Reserve's campaign since 2008 to rev up the economy with cheap money.

At Cornell College, just outside of Cedar Rapids, 17 of 25 policies donated to the school during a fundraising campaign in the 1990s have needed, or soon will need, cash infusions or other changes because of weak interest earnings, said Mike Kragenbrink, the school's assistant controller. "It is a terrible situation."

Insurers blame circumstances beyond their control and note that materials provided to consumers state that only a minimum interest rate is guaranteed, and higher ones used in sales pitches are hypothetical.

Big insurers including MetLife Inc., MET +0.18% New York Life Insurance Co. and Prudential Financial Inc. PRU +0.46% reached class-action settlements in the 1990s totaling billions of dollars over allegedly misleading customers about the way policies work and the ability of many middle-class families to afford them. Some settlements covered universal-life customers.
Enlarge Image

Steven and Joanne Carfrae with their grandchildren. Low interest rates forced the Carfraes to reduce the death benefit of a universal life policy. Stephen Allen for The Wall Street Journal

Amid those scandals, state insurance regulators required changes to sales materials to highlight the interest-rate risk. Insurers also introduced new offerings stressing features other than interest-income buildup.

Not all policyholders blame the insurers or their agents for their plight.

"It seemed like a solid investment at the time," Larry Sovern, 69, former owner of an electrical-sign company in Cedar Rapids, said of the $200,000 Cincinnati Life Insurance Co. policy he bought in 1990. It earned 8.5% interest then and now earns 5.5%. He said he understood rates could fall.

In July, Mr. Sovern reduced the policy's face value by half, to $100,000, to lower the annual insurance charges and added $12,600 to the cash-value account to make the policy last until he would be at least 81.

A company spokeswoman declined to discuss individual policies, but said the company has "a high level of confidence" that agents "represent our products fairly in the marketing process."

Jack Roland, 84, a former owner of a burial-vault business in Cedar Rapids, bought a universal-life policy in 1982 paying 11.7% interest. After his wife died and his children no longer needed the $400,000 death benefit, he earmarked the money for scholarships at Kirkwood Community College through a gift to a community foundation.

The policy now pays 4.5% annual interest. This year's insurance charge is $29,847, which will eat up almost all of the about $30,000 in cash value.

Absent Mr. Roland's death, the foundation by next year likely will try to sell the policy—at a steep discount to face amount—to an investment firm via a national secondary market for life policies. If a sale goes through, at least some scholarships would be funded but not nearly as many as Mr. Roland had hoped.

"I'm mad at myself for buying the damn thing in the first place," Mr. Roland said

Universal Life Policies Hurt by Low-Rate Era - WSJ

Originally Posted by marsh56

I have enjoyed the discussion here with Ribshaw but that's about it. He is the only who seems to enjoy honest debate.

So the rest of us are dishonest?

Regarding being "off topic", once again I was not the one to open the door. That was PPBlog.

Where did PPBlog suggest social security was a legal ponzi?

Apparently the same rules do not apply equally.

Ill ask you again. where did he suggest social security was a legal ponzi?

One other point of clarification and off I go.

So you are telling us again you are going to run away ?

I am happy to educate and answer any questions regarding the information I share. Otherwise, I do not have time to waste on theories and speculation.

Then why say
1. You are going away?
2. Why suggest the speculative point about social security?
[quote]

What did I say earlier about sounding too good to be true?

I don't know what did you say?

I have been in the insurance business for over 35 years and did not know about these plans until I found Dillard's site. Now, as a licensed agent, I can help others with the concept and Dillard does not make a penny. How is that a BAD thing?

It isnt!
How is it anything to do with the TOTALLY DIFFERENT POINT of his involvement in a scam ?

This loan option has been available with some companies for over 100 years. What most people--including me--did NOT know is that you can legally OVER FUND a policy within IRS Rule 7702 and have ready cash available for ANY purpose you choose. NO credit check, NO mounds of paperwork, NO income verification.

Again so what? what has that to do with the scam?

Had I not learned this from Dillard, I most likely would not have studied this end of the business because I was not aware of it. Since then, I have helped my own family plus dozens of others. Again, how is that a BAD thing?

And again if Diullard had given you advice on childcare or car repair or woodwork .....so what?

Honestly I could care less what any of you think about Dillard.

what we think isnt at issue! Look! Can you just get with the programme! The title of the thread might give you a clue. It is about a so called business which Dillard and others promote. Whether or not he is a great dad or can build great bookshelves or whatever isn't the issue!

You have a right to your opinions as I do.

No no no no no. You just aren't getting it! If you claim that Dillard is running a legit business then it is for you to support that claimn with evidence. Sayting he is a great cabinet maker does not constitute such evidence!

I did not participate in the Forex program that turned out to be a scam because I did my OWN diligence. I do NOT agree with their current gold and silver recommendations. Yet I personally know some people who are doing VERY well with similar strategies right now. It's just not for me.

Whether or not it is for you you claimed Elevation is a legit business.

The bottom line is this one insurance strategy ... This is a LEGAL way ... And I learned all this from two firms on a Rolodex of someone characterized as a known scammer. Works for me! And for others I have helped as well.

So the basis of you argument is...You believe Elevation is legit based on Dillard referring you to someone who has nothing to do with the claimed business of elevation?

GOOD results can often come from BAD circumstances. It's all about mindset. Did Edison FAIL 1000 times or did he just find 1001 WAYS and MEANS to create the first light bulb?

Did edison claim his light bulb was a phonograph and that the light bulb was a patent by a friend of the guy who made his daughters bookshelf?

Originally Posted by marsh56

I continue to be accused of going off topic even though I did not introduce any of the side topics.

Lol . . . what a liar.

Originally Posted by marsh56

Thanks for all the replies. I still appreciate Ribshaw's the most because he is reasonable and fair.

Please list how the rest of us are unreasonanble and unfair instead of making unsupported allegations.

That makes for good debate. The rest of you seem to have your minds made up already. Not much to debate there.

NO! Making unsupported allegations is "not much debate". It isnt a question of whether oir not the rest of us have made up our minds. In fact you have not ever stated about WHAT you think we have made up our minds.

I continue to be accused of going off topic even though I did not introduce any of the side topics.

Can you please show
1. WHO FIRST suggested social security is a legal ponzi!
2. How social security being a ponzi has ANYTHING to do with Elevation or Dillard?

Therefore I will no longer reply in kind.

Apparently you will just run away from supporting you above claims.

It is difficult to debate when one side is allowed to bring in side topics. Honestly I do not see that any of us have strayed too far. But that is just my opinion.

You can try to play the victim but if you believe anyone else brought in off topic issues then you are totally free to highlight them and report them.
By the way I didnt report your off topic remarks.
Clearly I set up this thread because you were posting off topic remarks about elevation and Dillard in the Banners Broker thread.
I set up this thread to allow you to discuss those off topic remarks here.
you have totally failed to show it is a legit business. If you want to run away after that then suit yourself but nobody personally attacked you.
And no you didnt stray so far that I complained.All I did was attempt to bring you back to the topic of the discussion. a topic you continually fail to address.

Back to Dillard. Most of you here believe he is a scammer. So be it.

I dont know what he is. All I know is he admitted to being involved in a scam. Yo then claimed Elevation isnt a scam and his involvement was legit. We then set up this thread and you failed to support your claim.

I have personally benefited from information found within my membership. I then took that information, added it to my financial services practice and now can help others as well.

again so what? If you personally benefitted from a new bookshelf built by Dillard WHAT would that have to do with elevation being legit?

Of course Dillard is compensated by his Rolodex vendors. I would expect nothing less.

If anyone here believes that all vendors in that program are misguided, I would be interested in actual proof vs. guilt by association.

No no no no no! You just keep getting it wrong. We dont have to go and show a number of anon associates of dillard are straight crooked or anything else. YOU
thats Y-O-U
You who claimed Elevation and Dillard were legit have to support your claims.

If dillard cut your lawn or built bookshelves for you or whatever that has nothing to do with the issue.

By the way, I occasionally put a word in ALL CAPS to EMPHASIZE a point. The written word has limits and I don't care to use bold. It's a simple choice. Amazing that it offends some people.

Whatever next? spelling flames? I use caps because shouting might just work when you seem to ignore all the constant repeating of the same questions to you. but if you are offended by that I am sorry and will try to emphasise using bold.

let me just remind you from message 1 in this discussion from YOU

Mike Dillard's Elevation Group ...

As a member of the group, I can say it is NOT a scam program. I have benefited personally from more than one of Mike's programs. ...
With EVG, the program stands on its own. In other words, you do NOT have to recruit to make money.

On not introducing off topic remarks
http://www.realscam.com/f8/elevation...445/#post76593

So PPBlog, is Social Security NOT a legal Ponzi? Where does the money come from except from other participants?
2...the Federal Reserve Bank is not "federal", has no money in "reserve" and is not a "bank", correct? It is a private corporation. It was never intended to have the power it has today to have fiat currency printed with impunity. ...
3 The IRS was supposed to be "temporary". ... Did you know that to this day, applying to pay "income tax" (W-4 form) is "voluntary"?

In other words, once you agree to be a "taxpayer", you then give the government the right to tax your income.

Thats THREE off topic conspiracy theories introduced by YOU not by anyone else!

Originally Posted by Blue Wolf

Lol . . . what a liar.

yeah.....no ****:

Honestly I could care less what any of you think about Dillard.

your whole argument is based on it. THAT'S what started it.

and the typical scammer line:

Therefore I will no longer reply in kind.

you'll be back. bank it.

I have personally benefited from information found within my membership.

and if you did from banners broker, you'd be here defending it just like you are dillard. How many other scams are you in?

"How many other scams are you in?"

A YOKEL of THIS depth?
If he WENT for such an OBVIOUS joke of a scam LIKE BB.....He IS a PONZI pimps dream CUSTOMER.

VIATICAL SETTLEMENTS

Off the top of my head I would rather go quail hunting with Dick Cheney than sell my policy to the likes of a Dillard. Having that greedy clown poking me with a stick every few days, no thanks.

I had bought a policy in the early 2000s that had a terminal illness rider where I can get a chunk of cash if I have so many months to live. I also believe that the policy I bought in the late 80s had the rider added to it by the company, but am not 100%. I ended up cashing that one in, so who knows.

I only mention that as going to the company directly is probably a better option than going to a viatical broker, but shopping it appears to be a must.

Consumer tips Buying and Selling Viaticals as Investments

Comparison shop. Get quotes from several companies to make sure you have a competitive offer.
Find out the tax implications. Not all proceeds received from the sale of your life insurance policy are tax free.
It’s important to know that any of your creditors could claim your cash settlement.
Find out if you will lose any public assistance benefits such as food stamps or Medicaid if you get a cash settlement.
The buyer of your policy can periodically ask you about your health status. The buyer is required to give you a privacy notice outlining who will get this personal information. Be sure to read it.
Check all application forms for accuracy, especially your medical history. All questions must be answered truthfully and completely.
Make sure the viatical settlement provider agrees to put your settlement proceeds into an independent escrow account to protect your funds during the transfer.
Find out if you have the right to change your mind about the settlement AFTER you get the money. If so, how many days do you have to reconsider and return the money?

Why are life settlement fees so high? In part because a lot of sellers don’t know they can negotiate them down, says Glenn S. Daily, a New York fee-only insurance consultant.

Life Settlement Roulette - Forbes

Larry King had some issues with his deal.

Larry King Sues Over Life Settlement Deals | LifeHealthPro

https://www.fdic.gov/regulations/exa...10/senior.html

Ribshaw, just to be clear I personally own a permanent, whole life plan. These are the ones recommended by Dillard's vendors.

The plans come with a guarantee on the annual crediting amount to the cash value. In my case it is 4%. The company has also paid dividends annually for over 100 years. The recent average is about 6%. Of course, you don't get both. Just the higher of the two.

This enables uninterrupted compounding in my case since there are no ongoing fees related to the cash account. Some companies do charge a one-time fee the first year and then the compounding begins. Any loans are guaranteed by contract to have a 1% differential. In other words, if the company charges me 5% simple interest, they will credit the same principal amount in my cash account at 4%.

The annual premium remains the same as does the base death benefit for life. With my custom plan, I can stop paying premiums in 10 years and the policy can be paid up. The cash will continue to grow and to compound. Policy loans only become an issue if the annual interest is not paid. That is the responsibility of the policyholder, as it should be.

It is true that universal life (UL) policies were problematic. However, that does not absolve those on the investment side who sold (and still sell) variable life (VL) policies. These can be even more damaging since the investment account portion is directly in the market. As a whole, these also did well in the 80's and 90's until the tech bust in 2000 and then the bust of 2008.

Again, Dillard's vendors DO NOT recommend either UL or VL. In fact, whole life has been around a lot longer (some companies for over 200 years) and is much safer than the other options.

In the end, the agent is responsible for explaining how the policies work. In the US, we are required to carry Errors and Omissions Insurance (E&O), meaning we can be held responsible for what we SAY. That protects consumers and is a good thing. However, it is the client's responsibility to READ the contract before signing it. As an agent, I cannot force someone to do what they should be doing anyway.

Tons of wealth was lost both in 2000 and 2008, most of it in the stock market. Yet that does not make investing a bad option. It's all about doing diligence and making wise choices.

Thanks again for all of your input on this topic and for attempting to advance the story.

Mark

The Ponzi or even overstated returns side of investments also seems to run wild in the Viatical arena. If Forex Scams are the Wild West, this is like yachting off the coast of Somalia. So far as I can tell there is very little regulation and in some places none at all. As Patrick mentioned there were any number of scams where promoters claimed to be buying polices but were just playing a money game. Short of having the policies held in some type of independently audited trust I don't know how a would be investor would actually know what they were getting.

I don't know if Dillard is peddling these as part of his rolodex, be informed if he is...

=============================================

In other stockbroker fraud news, the SEC has reached a settlement with a Florida attorney accused of being involved in a financial scam run by a viaticals company that defrauded investors of over $1 billion. The securities action, which restrains Michael McNerney from future securities violations, is SEC v. McNerney. He is the ex-outside counsel for now defunct Mutual Benefits Corp.

The MBC sales agent and the company’s marketing materials allegedly falsely claimed that viatical settlements were “secure” and “safe” investments as part of the strategy to get clients to invest. The viaticals company also is accused of improperly obtaining polices that couldn’t be sold or bought, improperly managing escrow premium funds in a Ponzi scam, and pressuring doctors to approve bogus false life expectancy figures.

McNerney, who was sentenced to time in prison for conspiracy to commit securities fraud, must pay $826 million in restitution (jointly and severally with other defendants convicted over the MBC offering fraud).

Viaticals :: Stock Broker Fraud Blog


=============================================


The other side of the fraud involved brokers buying and then selling polices under false pretenses. Since there were lies on the applications, the insurance companies challenged the benefits when a claim was made. If you held an investment in these policies it might not end well. Good discussion here.

Viatical Settlement Investment Scams and Dubious Life Settlement Insurance Programs for Investor Fraud Victims

=============================================

The double digit returns are often based on the assumption that the insureds will die within 18-24 months. If that does not happen, additional money may need to be ponied up to keep polices in force. Since these are sold often sold in pools, there is an additional risk that the other investors might not want to put any more in. This has the result of lowering returns.

Investors Sue Viatical Broker Over Poor Predictions - Law360

Any number of states and organizations have their own warnings and commentary.

http://www.michigan.gov/documents/ci...62_25009_7.pdf
http://tn.gov/securities/documents/Viaticals.pdf
Viatical SettlementsTips for Investing
Investing in Viaticals - Lawyers.com
http://www.aaii.com/journal/article/...al-settlements

Ribshaw, Dillard does not buy life policies. Also, viaticals are not the same as fractional life settlements. That is an apples and oranges comparison.

Viaticals are for those who are terminally ill. Fractionals are for those who want their cash value NOW and actually generally receive MORE than is in the contract.

Fractionals are a win-win since the policyholder gets more money now and the purchaser gets an immediate equity position. In other words, there is no way the policyholder can lose.

Short of having the policies held in some type of independently audited trust I don't know how a would be investor would actually know what they were getting.

This is how the legitimate fractional companies operate. The policies are held in a collective trust with oversight by the SEC and the local insurance authorities in the respective state. There are bad eggs on this side of the industry as well. Always will be. Buyer beware.

Mark

Originally Posted by marsh56

In the end, the agent is responsible for explaining how the policies work. In the US, we are required to carry Errors and Omissions Insurance (E&O), meaning we can be held responsible for what we SAY. That protects consumers and is a good thing. However, it is the client's responsibility to READ the contract before signing it. As an agent, I cannot force someone to do what they should be doing anyway.Mark

The agent is responsible if he wants to be seen as a professional. The "client's responsibility" is a bit of a brush off on your part. If I go to a doctor, attorney, CPA, mechanic, or other professional should I not have 100% confidence that they are telling me the truth? Errors on their part could have the effect to ruin my life. Are you suggesting we Google everything and no one has to do their job anymore?

As for Dillard I would sooner let a five year old change a tire on my car than take his advice on anything. He has proved time and time again he is either incompetent or an outright fraud. It may have something to do with his "Attraction Marketing", by default we must conclude he has an abundance of larceny on the brain. Personal responsibility is great, but people need an honest place to get good advice.

Originally Posted by marsh56

It will be fully paid up in 10 years and there are ZERO ongoing fees.

This enables uninterrupted compounding in my case since there are no ongoing fees related to the cash account.

Mark this is where I really have a problem. This is the second time you have said this. If you open your policy you will see there are mortality expenses. Now either these were massively loaded in the first ten years, or more likely they occur each year.

Additionally, let's look at the definition of a dividend.

After paying claims, expenses and other liabilities, and funding the policy reserves used to provide for future benefits, the company determines how much should be distributed to policy owners. This amount is distributed annually in the form of dividends. What are life insurance dividends?

Seriously, if you can't get it right here, what are we to expect is coming out of the mouth of agents all around the country who at least in theory were vetted by Dillard?

Originally Posted by marsh56

Based on the life policies described here, it is NOT required BY CONTRACT to repay policy loans.

Policy loans only become an issue if the annual interest is not paid. That is the responsibility of the policyholder, as it should be.

This is at best a 1/2 truth. I question why agents say it other than to make it sound better than it is. The loan is either repaid when the policy is surrendered, lapses, or is subtracted from the death benefit. The insurance company does not just let you KEEP the loan+++. Either you pay a higher interest rate and get higher interest crediting, or you pay a lower rate and get lower crediting. This lowered return on your money is again a cost, not a freebee.

Originally Posted by marsh56

Any loans are guaranteed by contract to have a 1% differential. In other words, if the company charges me 5% simple interest, they will credit the same principal amount in my cash account at 4%.

This is not free or some miracle of finance. What many agents are selling is borrow all this money out, never pay anything back in and presto magic. What I am saying is that often turns out not to the case, or it is being way oversold.

I would also strongly suggest you start using a future value calculator. Plug in your policy premiums and run out 20 years at the rate you "think" you are getting then let's talk.

Compound Interest Calculator

I am not against insurance, any more than I am against the stock market. However, people deserve to get good information, not poppycock that passes as secrets of the rich.

Originally Posted by marsh56

Also, viaticals are not the same as fractional life settlements. That is an apples and oranges comparison.

I never made such a comparison. My reference to holding in polices in trust was for people who are investing in private pools, not the people selling their policies. This prevents a scammer from being able to pretend he is buying policies. I just threw in Larry King because I found it amusing, and that guy is like 150 and married 9 times, if anyone should have been a good bet on an early payoff it is him.

The obvious question "If Dillard is so great at setting up trusts to protect/hide assets, why did he have to give back $750,000 in ill gotten gains? "


My opinion this is more likely overpriced, nonsensical, and possibly illegal advice being peddled by Dillard. Best case scenario I see is people overpaying for standard advice. Worst case, getting sold a lot of needless bullshit and/or ending up on the wrong side of the law.

BS Asset Protection.JPG

My opinion as an internet blogger, I could just as easily be over at HOTorNOT down-voting the pretty people. It really is an area that is important and needs to be discussed with a competent attorney and insurance agent. There are a few links I will put up on this, I am in no way implying that these are the folks you should deal with. Just there is a lot of work that has been done on this, and a lot of crap being peddled for a lot of years. In is not unheard of that some of these "gurus" end up in jail.



================================================== ===========================

According to one source, the net worth threshold to enter into the top 1 percent of wealth in the U.S. is about $1.5 million. Let’s round this up to $2 million. The annual cost of a $2 million umbrella insurance policy will vary from provider to provider but will be in the range of about $300 to $400. That is a pretty inexpensive asset protection plan compared to the annual cost to maintain a structure proposed by these presenters.

While I don’t have a source, for the sake of argument, let’s just say that the top one-half percent wealth threshold is $5M. The annual cost of a $5 million umbrella insurance policy should run about $600 to $700. If we extend the coverage to a $10 million umbrella insurance policy, the annual expense might reasonably be $1000 to $1200.

Think about it: for 99 percent of the general population, insurance is a fairly low-cost solution for asset protection/risk management. In all fairness, insurance has its own limitations. However, insurance can be combined with existing estate, tax, and business planning to yield a respectable asset protection plan. Don’t be led to believe that one presenter’s solution is “the” way to meet your needs

Beware Of Asset Protection Scams - Forbes

================================================== ===========================

AWESOME SITE ON SCAMS...

Offshore Gurus Jerome Schneider and Eric Witmeyer Indicted
The author of some of the worst books on offshore and asset protection planning and his flakey tax attorney have been indicted for conspiracy to defraud the IRS and for wire fraud.


Asset Protection Scams


================================================== ===========================
I don't know that you will or won't hear any of this from contacts in Dillard's rolodex. What I can say is if you hang around these seminars long enough you will 4 sure.



PROMOTERS
Many unqualified people are marketing themselves as asset protection experts. Always check references and the training of the supposed expert. Anybody claiming expertise in asset protection should have substantial tax and international law training.

ASSET PROTECTION WILL SAVE YOU INCOME TAXES
If anybody promises that an asset protection plan will save you income taxes: RUN. Asset protection planning will not save you a penny on income tax (although it can help with estate taxes)

JUST PUT YOUR MONEY WITH A FOREIGN TRUST COMPANY, IT'S CHEAP AND EASY, TRUST ME
NEVER trust a foreign trustee (or anybody else) with your hard earned money. If somebody suggests that you have to "trust" somebody else: RUN.

WE'LL ENCUMBER YOUR PROPERTY, THERE WILL BE NO EQUITY TO TAKE
If a practitioner suggests that a related entity encumber your assets with phoney loans, RUN. This is a popular scam and it doesn't work (but it will cost you a lot of money and trouble).

ITS OFFSHORE, YOU DON'T HAVE TO PAY TAXES UNLESS YOU TAKE THE MONEY BACK INTO THE USA
If a practitioner suggests that the IRS can't find or tax the offshore account they are recommending then RUN because they are wrong. The IRS currently has more than 400 people working in FINCEN. Their purpose is to locate such accounts. Doing this is a crime and we have seen the United States spend millions of taxpayer's dollars to prosecute such crimes. Remember, citizens or residents of the United States are taxed on their world wide income "from whatever source derived."

NEVADA HAS GREAT SECRECY LAWS AND IT'S TAX FREE
Stay away from Nevada corporations. For some reason, many of the marginal schemes use Nevada corporations and addresses. This doesn't work and it is a red flag.

JUST DON'T TELL THEM ABOUT IT
If you are asked to lie: RUN. Asset protection should work because it is done properly. You should never be put into a position where your protection depends on deception. If all the details of your asset protection plan come to light you should not be compromised.

GIVE IT TO YOUR WIFE AND THEY CAN'T GET IT
If a practitioner suggests that you "give it away" (usually to a spouse or child) it is usually too late; and, this normally doesn't work. It is always a bad idea unless you were going to make the gift anyway.

Tips to watch out for asset protection schemes and scams


================================================== ===========================

Last for this section, there are a few assets that may be safe in a bankruptcy depending on the state where you live. Hide assets from a spouse, creditors, or the IRS at your own risk. I have included a few things you may hear in the tax protestor movement. Admittedly the last link is from the IRS so you will have to decide if you want to listen to them or the guy at the Day's Inn selling a no-tax tool kit.

Hiding Assets & Property in Bankruptcy | Nolo.com
Criminal Resource Manual 841 Concealment of Property -- 18 U.S.C. 152(1)
What Are the Consequences Of Hiding Assets During Divorce? - Forbes
Tax Protesters Never Win | Nolo.com
http://www.irs.gov/pub/irs-utl/friv_tax.pdf
http://www.irs.gov/Tax-Professionals...ction-I-A-to-C
http://www.irs.gov/Tax-Professionals...ction-I-D-to-E

Hiding Income Offshore

The IRS aggressively pursues taxpayers involved in abusive offshore transactions as well as the promoters, professionals and others who facilitate or enable these schemes.
http://www.irs.gov/uac/Don%E2%80%99t...ozen-Tax-Scams