Tuesday, March 25, 2014
Things People Tell Me: Banking, Courteous to Customers - ARGH!! It "Ain...
Things People Tell Me: Banking, Courteous to Customers - ARGH!! It "Ain...: What seems now to be a hundred years ago, my ancient grandfather said he didn't trust banks. He lived through the great Depression of 19...
Banking, Courteous to Customers - ARGH!! It "Aint' so good anymore
What seems now to be a hundred years ago, my ancient grandfather said he didn't trust banks. He lived through the great Depression of 1929, lost everything as he watched the big wigs of industry finger ticker tape losses then bail out multi-story windows and splash their bodies and blood on sidewalks below.
He survived. Losing everything, oil baron that he was, he survived, hung in there and provided for his family by selling cleaning supplies to banks and washing floors til his death at 93. He worked until 5 days before he died. He set the standard for us.
I wish he was still around for the punks that litter American corporations today, at least the people that are in American Corporations..
Take large banks. Oh, try grabbing up those " easy " commercials you see on TV where you can re-fi your homes by just picking up the phone, sign a few papers and enjoy the cash that floats back to you like a magic carpet.
The reality: by my lights, you are in for the hassle of your life. I thought used car salespeople were awful. Say no to them and one could endure as many as 13 phone calls from bank sales people up to vice presidents - all one day.
The last straw was one where I threatened to call the police and file a threatening complaint. That seemed to stop it. One "Mortgage " company headquartered in the mid west was initially cooperative, when I bowed out, they turned hostile. Angered and resentful, the phone calls streamed in. Their TV ads feature their smiling president. Him, I didn't hear from The second mortgage company holds my mortgage, their rates were out of site. The smiley rep, threw rates off the wall, and assumed because we were in our 70's, we somehow had entered senility.
I hate that. Deluged by barrels of complicated paperwork, I tossed him aside and went for #3. That was 3 months ago. Largest of the 6 banks mentioned in the movie "Too Big to Fail," it is any wonder they didn't. Famous on Wall Street for "smoke Stacking" no one seems to know on the inside what anyone else on their own inside is doing. After threatening them with competitor #4, they gave me what I wanted, then didn't return my phone calls.
No one at any of the 3 large financial institutions showed the least interest in courtesy, respect for our intelligence. They all talked down to us, like we were ignorant farmers. No one apologized for delays, missed appointments, lack of follow-up, breach of etiquette. Some were outright rude.
I'm going to a credit Union on Monday.
He survived. Losing everything, oil baron that he was, he survived, hung in there and provided for his family by selling cleaning supplies to banks and washing floors til his death at 93. He worked until 5 days before he died. He set the standard for us.
I wish he was still around for the punks that litter American corporations today, at least the people that are in American Corporations..
Take large banks. Oh, try grabbing up those " easy " commercials you see on TV where you can re-fi your homes by just picking up the phone, sign a few papers and enjoy the cash that floats back to you like a magic carpet.
The reality: by my lights, you are in for the hassle of your life. I thought used car salespeople were awful. Say no to them and one could endure as many as 13 phone calls from bank sales people up to vice presidents - all one day.
The last straw was one where I threatened to call the police and file a threatening complaint. That seemed to stop it. One "Mortgage " company headquartered in the mid west was initially cooperative, when I bowed out, they turned hostile. Angered and resentful, the phone calls streamed in. Their TV ads feature their smiling president. Him, I didn't hear from The second mortgage company holds my mortgage, their rates were out of site. The smiley rep, threw rates off the wall, and assumed because we were in our 70's, we somehow had entered senility.
I hate that. Deluged by barrels of complicated paperwork, I tossed him aside and went for #3. That was 3 months ago. Largest of the 6 banks mentioned in the movie "Too Big to Fail," it is any wonder they didn't. Famous on Wall Street for "smoke Stacking" no one seems to know on the inside what anyone else on their own inside is doing. After threatening them with competitor #4, they gave me what I wanted, then didn't return my phone calls.
No one at any of the 3 large financial institutions showed the least interest in courtesy, respect for our intelligence. They all talked down to us, like we were ignorant farmers. No one apologized for delays, missed appointments, lack of follow-up, breach of etiquette. Some were outright rude.
I'm going to a credit Union on Monday.
Sunday, March 16, 2014
Adam Walsh (America's Most Wanted) on Gun Control
ok, so I've overdone it a bit, 
But, you get idea. the idea, right? On Gun Control, certain people make a whole lot of sense, others don't. Ford was right. Back then, the Indians eventually took it on the chin. Confined to "reservations" denuded of some weapons, and allowed to hunt on ancestral lands, they did so, feeling confined as such.
But, you get idea. the idea, right? On Gun Control, certain people make a whole lot of sense, others don't. Ford was right. Back then, the Indians eventually took it on the chin. Confined to "reservations" denuded of some weapons, and allowed to hunt on ancestral lands, they did so, feeling confined as such.
Never mind, Ford went on with Lindbergh to try and make a "deal" with Hitler, but.....never mind, that's besides the point. I digress.
Adam Walsh, famed grieving father of America's Most Wanted, and frankly most loved for getting one helluva lot of outlaws off our streets, has begun to venture off the beaten path and into the political realm of commentary. In my opinion, he does this, as many of the Hollywood Illuminati do, mistaking their fame for innate intellligence, expounding their "God-given Intelligence" on public issues for which they are not equipped to handle. Forth with - Walsh on Gun Control.
His latest gambit is 85% on target with yours truly, yet he strays with this, " No one needs an AK-47. You can't hunt with an AK-47, there is no reason in the world to own one." To compound this fractured nonsense, my own Best Friend (capitals inferred) living in Florida used almost the same words recently.
My point: " don't need an AK 17? " Oh no? Who says? You? Who sets up the rules? You? Walsh? Oh, the government, that's right, we're going to give THE GOVERNMENT THE RIGHT TO CONTROL whether we can have an AK-47, . Sure. I ask you this, describe accurately what is an 'ASSAULT RIFLE?'
Name one by brand or caliber. Bet you can't. If you trust ANY form of government to do it, you're in danger, cause they will screw it up. Don't think so? How's your healthcare plan working?
I don't want Adam Walsh OR my best friend in Florida telling me OR YOU wthat I know I am constitutionally permitted to buy and own..The Second Amendment tells me what I am allowed to do. Take that away and there will be no stopping them. Don't think so?Check with Connecticut to see if they have begun to lock up a couple of hundred thousand formerly honest gun owning citizens? The Police have THREATENED to go house-to-house to confiscate their guns. And we thought the S.S. days had gone by, eh? Check back with Crimea in six months and count how many have faced the firing squads? First thing they did was take the guns away from their Army.###
Friday, March 14, 2014
Women in Combat - now on the front lines
We were told, as of this morning, that our young American women could be admitted into the ranks of front line combat troops.
Television reporters showed clips of young women being trained in combat drills handling mortars, machine gun train-fire attacks, and other combat unit exercises. The report went on to outline in matter-of-fact detail, "now that women have been given the green light to join men in front line combat roles," we got to see them shooting weapons.
It concentrated on solely weight requirements: can they lift this, can they move that.
Nothing on the psychological implications of our young women sent back from the front lines with both legs blown off. No word on how attractive young ladies handle the rest of their lives after being gang-raped by a horde of enemy soldiers.e
I've never seen reported on TV any information about other nations with women in combat, the effects on them, success, or failure. Have You?? I knew Israel had their women in combat at one time, but nothing since?
The fact that our women were allowed into combat AT ALL came as a surprise and shock to me. Where was the public discussion? Where was the public input? These days, the least little ripple in the public fabric draws wide public outcry: that punk Justin, a missing plane on the other side of the globe, what an alcoholic actress wears to her latest trial...but our women NOW allowed in combat and we get NO PUBLIC NOTICE??
Oh, yes, the women will get plenty of late night guard duty, there is the prospect of the glass ceiling, hours, days and foreverness of KP duty, cleaning the Loo, and other crap duties the male Sergeants will assign them, to be sure. And, as any military NCOs will tell you, the sexual assaults inside the the outfits are on the rise - are skyrocketing.
A real headache for the commanders, a new headache they never had before, but what the hell, times are changing, and we have to change with them. The war on women continues, even if they insist on it.
And what about the men who are old-fashioned, who feel that woman-hood must be protected, adored, loved, shielded from the ugliness of the world? What of them? The men who volunteer to marry, love, honor, obey, sign up for the military, go away and fight for country, wife and children.
Simple: ignore them, their values, and call them names. How dare they exist in this brave new world.
###
Television reporters showed clips of young women being trained in combat drills handling mortars, machine gun train-fire attacks, and other combat unit exercises. The report went on to outline in matter-of-fact detail, "now that women have been given the green light to join men in front line combat roles," we got to see them shooting weapons.
It concentrated on solely weight requirements: can they lift this, can they move that.
Nothing on the psychological implications of our young women sent back from the front lines with both legs blown off. No word on how attractive young ladies handle the rest of their lives after being gang-raped by a horde of enemy soldiers.e
I've never seen reported on TV any information about other nations with women in combat, the effects on them, success, or failure. Have You?? I knew Israel had their women in combat at one time, but nothing since?
The fact that our women were allowed into combat AT ALL came as a surprise and shock to me. Where was the public discussion? Where was the public input? These days, the least little ripple in the public fabric draws wide public outcry: that punk Justin, a missing plane on the other side of the globe, what an alcoholic actress wears to her latest trial...but our women NOW allowed in combat and we get NO PUBLIC NOTICE??
Oh, yes, the women will get plenty of late night guard duty, there is the prospect of the glass ceiling, hours, days and foreverness of KP duty, cleaning the Loo, and other crap duties the male Sergeants will assign them, to be sure. And, as any military NCOs will tell you, the sexual assaults inside the the outfits are on the rise - are skyrocketing.
A real headache for the commanders, a new headache they never had before, but what the hell, times are changing, and we have to change with them. The war on women continues, even if they insist on it.
And what about the men who are old-fashioned, who feel that woman-hood must be protected, adored, loved, shielded from the ugliness of the world? What of them? The men who volunteer to marry, love, honor, obey, sign up for the military, go away and fight for country, wife and children.
Simple: ignore them, their values, and call them names. How dare they exist in this brave new world.
###
Saturday, March 8, 2014
Full Employment - 5% unemployment (Wharton School graduate)
When I worked in a Denver Hotel a few years back, when the economy was busting it's seams open, I recall our National Unemployment rate was 5%.
As I was instructed in Wharton School, my professors were diligent in pointing out that at about 5% unemployment, just about everyone who wanted a job, had one. Therefore, they said, you could consider that - full employment.
Ok, our hotel, located in central Denver, was running full, short of employees, was hard put to drag people off the street to work for us at standard wages. It was under a heavily managed Contract company in Dallas with a strict salary schedule for all positions, mine included. I was NOT senior management.
As I passed the center median in the street there was a pan-handler selling papers I asked him if he wanted a job, he said yes. I told him my hotel would hire him if he just walked in and applied.
He asked me what salary the hotel paid, and I told him. It was not a bad wage for the work involved, by the way. He snickered a little and then said, No thanks, I'll stay here on the corner.
I make more money begging for money than I would working 40 hours a week at that hotel. " But thanks for caring."
Now, that tells me several things: As Americans, are we too generous to the unemployed? Next, are the wages paid at the average hotel so substandard for their workers commensurate to their labors, that there should be somee measure of fairness applied? (that discussion could take drums of ink and months of public discourse).
If the first is true, why then shouldn't that portion of one's tax base given to support unempl0yment insurance be lowered?
As I was instructed in Wharton School, my professors were diligent in pointing out that at about 5% unemployment, just about everyone who wanted a job, had one. Therefore, they said, you could consider that - full employment.
Ok, our hotel, located in central Denver, was running full, short of employees, was hard put to drag people off the street to work for us at standard wages. It was under a heavily managed Contract company in Dallas with a strict salary schedule for all positions, mine included. I was NOT senior management.
As I passed the center median in the street there was a pan-handler selling papers I asked him if he wanted a job, he said yes. I told him my hotel would hire him if he just walked in and applied.
He asked me what salary the hotel paid, and I told him. It was not a bad wage for the work involved, by the way. He snickered a little and then said, No thanks, I'll stay here on the corner.
I make more money begging for money than I would working 40 hours a week at that hotel. " But thanks for caring."
Now, that tells me several things: As Americans, are we too generous to the unemployed? Next, are the wages paid at the average hotel so substandard for their workers commensurate to their labors, that there should be somee measure of fairness applied? (that discussion could take drums of ink and months of public discourse).
If the first is true, why then shouldn't that portion of one's tax base given to support unempl0yment insurance be lowered?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)