Or At Least a Way to Get Senators to Focus on Health Care; a Way to Organize Your Bank Accounts; and a Way to Sharpen Your Wits
|
THIS I own a sliver of
Posit Science, whose Brain Fitness Program I offer for
your consideration from time to time. So now come the results
of a two-year, 524-participant, “randomized, controlled, double-blind” study that
reportedly showed that “the Posit
Science program genuinely improves
memory overall” and that “study
participants in the experimental group reported significant improvements in
their everyday lives [ranging] from remembering a shopping list without
having to write it down; to hearing conversations in noisy restaurants more
clearly; to being more independent, feeling more self-confident, finding words
more easily and having improved self-esteem in general.” F Skeptical? Well, who wouldn’t be. But the evidence grows that if an older
person actually uses the program (buying it alone seems not to be enough; they have
to actually use it), they might be one of the three out of four who notice positive
changes in their everyday lives. JIM HIGHGTOWER From his column
Friday: It's always impressive to see a politician take an unbending
stand on principle, so I salute George W. for going against popular opinion by
vetoing the State Children's Health Insurance Program bill, which would have
extended health coverage to some 6 million uninsured children in our country. Bush said that what
irked him about this children's health proposal is the principle of providing
government-financed coverage, which he derided as "federalized" medicine. George,
you see, is a die-hard privatization ideologue, and he insists that people
should get their health care from the free market, not the government. The vast
majority of his Republican colleagues in Congress agreed, voting to uphold his
veto of the children's bill. . . . Since Bush and his
GOP allies don't believe in federalized medicine . . .
it is our duty to free them of the burden of having their own health coverage
paid for by us taxpayers! As a matter of principle, we must take away their
government health plans and let them buy their own in the free market. This idea offers two pluses: 1) Taxpayers will no longer have to
pay benefits to politicians who are ideologically opposed to them, and 2) the money saved can be redirected to the
millions of American children without health coverage. If [this] idea appeals to you, call the
GOP congressional conference and urge that its members give up their
"federalized" health plans: 202/225-5107. And while you're at it,
tell them to forego their socialized government retirement money, too. After
all, it's the principle of the thing. MINT.COM Dan Jackson: “I’ve tried out Mint.com for the last few
months and it’s pretty clean. The
reporting is definitely inferior to Quicken/MSMoney
but setup is much easier so it doesn’t take much time to give it a shot. I did run into some synchronization issues
with certain banks but they were incredibly fast to resolve.” Nancy Wolcott: “Mint.com looks wonderful. But how are they offering it for free? I’m happy
not to pay, but it makes me nervous.” F Their game plan
is ad revenue and “sponsored links.” My
friend who’s one of the founders says: “Some of the offers we present are sponsored, meaning we
earn a referral fee if you sign up for them.
However, Mint will always show you an unsponsored
offer ahead of a sponsored one if it will save you more money. We sort offers in order of their value to
users, regardless of sponsorship.” Mark Centuori: “The ‘money management’ moniker is
premature. Given the plethora of
non-bank-related financial assets that dominate personal finance today, Mint
currently has very limited functionality by only handling credit card and true
bank accounts. The ability for users to
include other financial assets can’t be excluded for long and in my opinion
should already be part of the package. .
. . Adding
credit card accounts is a hit-and-miss proposition. I tried typing in both ‘AT&T’ and ‘AT&T
Universal Card,’ neither of which was found.
So I went to the link I use to pay the account and pasted the URL into
the search field. Still not found. Then I searched on only the dot-com portion
of the URL, ‘accountonline,’ and received as an
option none other than, ‘AT&T Universal Card.’ Ugh.
Similarly, entering ‘Chase Bank’ didn’t work (not withstanding that it’s
the name on the back of the card) but ‘Chase Credit Card’ did. I was also able to add the account via the ‘Chase
Credit Cards (aka Bank One Visa)’ option but the ‘Chase Cards (Formerly FirstUSA)’ option didn’t work despite being part of my
account’s pedigree. , , , Where is Mint sourcing merchant names from? They don’t accurately reflect what appears on
the actual statements. If Mint has room
to display ‘Rickshaw Restaurant Lounge,’ why am I left with only ‘Fred,’ ‘Burger’
and ‘Taco’ for Meyer, King and F This is how
Quicken started, making fun of Managing Your Money for having so many
capabilities. And then they started
adding them. If only MYM’s
publisher had been a little more farsighted, we would have been Quicken.
But then I’d probably have died long ago when pirates boarded my yacht,
throwing us all overboard – my crew of 20 and me – to be eaten by sharks. So who’s to say it didn’t work out for the
best? Russell Turpin: “Before someone puts the usernames and
passwords for all their financial accounts into a service like Mint, they
should consider the potential exposure if a hacker somehow manages to obtain
that information. The convenience of such a service is attractive. The single point of failure it creates for
one's financial life is scary.” F My friend
responds: “Mint
does not store your credentials, we use them once to
create a linkage with your account(s).
Consider the benefits of being able to see all your account activity in
one place – makes it easy to spot any suspicious activity (remember 90% of
fraud occurs offline). Mint offers
alerts (via email, or text message) to bring unusual spending to your
attention.”
© 1998, 1999, 2000, 2001, 2002, 2003, 2004, 2005, 2006, 2007 Andrew Tobias