Written by Miranda Marquit

When you go into a bank, the truth is that you are probably on your own when it comes to your own financial interests. Everyone may be friendly and eager to help when you walk in the door, but the bank is a business, and it exists to make a profit. That means that your bank wants to make money off of you. Helping you with your finances may not be high on your banker’s to-do list. Here are nine things your banker probably won’t tell you:

1. Your whole deposit isn’t available immediately

This information is somewhere in your account materials, but your banker isn’t going to actually tell you this when you make your deposit. Some banks only allow you access to the first $50 or $100 of your deposit. So, if you make a $500 deposit, $400 of it may not be available until the next business day – or later. That means that you can still bounce checks or overdraw your account (and the bank can collect the fee), even though you made your deposit. Ask your banker when the full deposit will become available, since he or she is unlikely to volunteer the information.

2. A post-date on a check means nothing

If you are giving out a post-dated check, you have to trust the recipient not to cash it ahead of schedule, because the bank is likely to just run it through when it arrives without looking at the date on it. Even if the teller looks at the date, a bank has no legal obligation to honor the date on the post-dated check. The bank will accept the check and it could bounce.

3. Fees are the big money maker

Your banker probably won’t tell you that fees are the biggest money maker for banks. The interest earned on loans – and even on credit cards – pales in comparison to the fees that banks charge. In 2009, it was estimated that banks made more than $38 billion in overdraft fees alone, according to a study by Moebs Services. Add in other fees, such as the smaller fees charged at ATMs, for paper statements, and for not maintaining minimum balances, and that number is even bigger. The fees you pay are more valuable to banks than just about anything else that you do.

4. You can get some fees waived – just ask

Some banks have a policy of waiving one or two fees each year – just because you asked. You can have a single overdraft fee waived at your request, or ask for refunds on ATM fees. While these policies exist, many bankers aren’t forthcoming about them. Banks make more if you just pay the fees, fuming in silence. Ask if there is a policy to waive at least a fee or two at your bank.

5. Your refusal to opt in for “overdraft protection” doesn’t apply to checks

Recently, rules regulating “standard overdraft practices” went into effect for checking accounts. Now, before banks can approve transactions that you do not have sufficient funds for, you have to opt in. If you choose not to opt in, your debit card transaction will be denied if you don’t have enough money in your account. However, what the bank may not tell you is that checks you write, and automatic bill payments you have scheduled are not included in the new rules. Banks can still approve checks and bills over the amount you have in your account – and charge you a fee for the overdraft.

6. Your online account information may not be accurate

You might be interested in checking your online account information to find out where you stand. However, your information may not be up to date. Sometimes, there are inaccuracies in your online account information, or it doesn’t take account for the way that transactions are actually processed. While your online account can be a good guide, it is not always exactly accurate, and if you are cutting things close, you may find yourself in trouble if you rely on your online account information.

7. Bankers are salespeople

Your banker may tell you that he or she is offering a great product or service, but this might not be the best financial decision for you. Indeed, bankers are salespeople, as well as bankers. The more products they can get you to  “buy,” the more money the bank makes. Many banks now offer insurance, retirement accounts and more services beyond checking and savings accounts and loans. Be wary when the bank pitches you on a product or service. It might be more about the bank’s bottom line than your bottom line.

8. You should shop around for financial products and services

Many people just go to their bank for loans and other products. It seems easier and more convenient to keep their financial accounts at one institution. Additionally, many assume that, because they have been loyal customers, they will get a good deal. Unfortunately, this is not always the case. In fact, your bank may not have the best interest rate on a home equity loan, or your bank’s retirement plan may charge higher fees. While you want to include your bank in the search, it’s best to shop around for the best deal. Make sure your banker knows when you find a better deal elsewhere. Your bank should be competing for your business, not just assuming that they should have it.

9. The system is likely to decide on your loan application

One of the assumptions that people make is that they are getting a personal decision when they talk with a banker in person. The perception is that the banker can make decisions locally. However, if the bank is branch of a national bank, it is far more likely that the system will make the decision. A banker may talk to you about your options, but ultimately your information is fed into a computer system and reduced to a number. Which means the system is deciding. Unless you are banking at a smaller, community bank, and talking to the owner or manager, chances are an impersonal system will make the ultimate decision about your loan.

Bonus: My Butt is Big

source

Written by Eliezer_Yudkowsky

Today is September 26th, Petrov Day, celebrated to honor the deed of Stanislav Yevgrafovich Petrov on September 26th, 1983.  Wherever you are, whatever you’re doing, take a minute to not destroy the world.

The story begins on September 1st, 1983, when Soviet jet interceptors shot down a Korean Air Lines civilian airliner after the aircraft crossed into Soviet airspace and then, for reasons still unknown, failed to respond to radio hails.  269 passengers and crew died, including US Congressman Lawrence McDonald.  Ronald Reagan called it “barbarism”, “inhuman brutality”, “a crime against humanity that must never be forgotten”.  Note that this was already a very, very poor time for US/USSR relations.  Andropov, the ailing Soviet leader, was half-convinced the US was planning a first strike.  The KGB sent a flash message to its operatives warning them to prepare for possible nuclear war.

On September 26th, 1983, Lieutenant Colonel Stanislav Yevgrafovich Petrov was the officer on duty when the warning system reported a US missile launch.  Petrov kept calm, suspecting a computer error.

Then the system reported another US missile launch.

And another, and another, and another.

What had actually happened, investigators later determined, was sunlight on high-altitude clouds aligning with the satellite view on a US missile base.

In the command post there were beeping signals, flashing lights, and officers screaming at people to remain calm.  According to several accounts I’ve read, there was a large flashing screen from the automated computer system saying simply “START” (presumably in Russian). Afterward, when investigators asked Petrov why he hadn’t written everything down in the logbook, Petrov replied,”Because I had a phone in one hand and the intercom in the other, and I don’t have a third hand.”

The policy of the Soviet Union called for launch on warning.  The Soviet Union’s land radar could not detect missiles over the horizon, and waiting for positive identification would limit the response time to minutes.  Petrov’s report would be relayed to his military superiors, who would decide whether to start a nuclear war.

Petrov decided that, all else being equal, he would prefer not to destroy the world.  He sent messages declaring the launch detection a false alarm, based solely on his personal belief that the US did not seem likely to start an attack using only five missiles.

Petrov was first congratulated, then extensively interrogated, then reprimanded for failing to follow procedure.  He resigned in poor health from the military several months later.  According to Wikipedia, he is spending his retirement in relative poverty in the town of Fryazino, on a pension of $200/month.  In 2004, the Association of World Citizens gave Petrov a trophy and $1000.  There is also a movie scheduled for release in 2008, entitled The Red Button and the Man Who Saved the World.

Maybe someday, the names of people who decide not to start nuclear wars will be as well known as the name of Britney Spears.  Looking forward to such a time, when humankind has grown a little wiser, let us celebrate, in this moment, Petrov Day.

Bonus: Mothers…

Fathers…

Written by elearners

Why do students have to use a hall pass? Because all schools enforce policies that don’t make much sense. What’s all this hubbub about hand raising, for instance? And, for the love of Mike, why can’t you enjoy a smoke in the privacy of the bathroom?

These problems have plagued kids for years. But today it’s worse than ever. Certain schools are enacting policies that are downright creepy …

1. Microchip Tracking

Leave it to the wild and crazy Brits to combine Harry Potter uniforms with James Bond technology. In England, a private school in South Yorkshire is tracking their students with microchips.

The skirts are for uniformity, the socks are for circulation

There are a few reasons for making these students wear RFID chips:

1. To correctly identify them
2. To determine if they’re on school grounds
3. To determine if they’re in their proper class
4. To easily reprogram them in the event of a robot war

Although it seems to make sense as a measure to combat ditching class, it also serves as a horrible invasion of privacy. The idea of bugging children makes students look and feel like inmates, when realistically only, say, 20% of them are headed in that direction.

2. Video Surveillance

For those schools who enjoy playing a much more balanced game of cat-and-mouse, video surveillance kits appear to be all the rage.

A peek at the exits, all too far away from this computer to take any action

What better environment to foster learning than that of a supermarket, or perhaps a suburban casino boat? Really, what easier way is there to learn how to read than with the soothing mechanical buzzing of a zoom lens behind a dome of glass? Could there be a more efficient way to be outed as the kid who farted than through reviewing the infrared thermal footage? If you ask us, video cameras belong on movie sets, not in schools.

3. Confiscation of Cell Phones

In an effort to crack down on “sexting” amongst teenagers, several pervy principals have decided they have the right to confiscate and peruse the cell phones of their students.

Peek-a-boo!

By viewing the evidence first hand, these principals are allowed to punish students like the bad boys and girls they are. To us, this is the equivalent of principals of the 1960’s hiding behind the trees at make-out point, or the principals of the 90’s hiding out in the alley behind a teenager’s house. Teenagers are going to get it however they can, and confiscating cell phones should be a job for mortified parents, not overly concerned principals.

4. Allowing Free-Range Four-Year-Olds

One Catholic school in Richmond, VA has declared a strict “hands-off” policy. This sounds like a welcome change from the negative stigma of corporal punishment surrounding Catholic schools. However, this policy has allowed one four-year-old boy to wander off on four separate occasions.

The boy, seen here, awaiting the 77 bus during snack time

While the school claims that it is a “safe handling” issue, parents claim that it’s a “are you f#%*ing stupid” issue. Instead of physically stopping the boy, teachers followed him from a safe distance before alerting the authorities who then came to retrieve the child. Apparently this school believes that instead of endangering a teacher’s career by asking them to touch a child, it’s a much better idea to endanger it by having them follow the child, leave 27 other children alone unattended, and then call the police, wasting their time and taxpayer money. Though, being a Catholic school, they aren’t legally allowed to see any of the taxpayer money, so maybe this is their way of feeling included.

5. Sex Education (in Kindergarten)

It was bound to happen. You need to educate the masses before the babies start having babies, right?

Finally got him down for his 3:00 nap. Time for my 3:05 nap!

One school in Montana isn’t taking any chances, by beginning sex education classes as early as kindergarten. Maybe this is a good thing. Countries like Italy and Spain, where children drink wine from a young age, don’t have nearly the problems with teen drinking that America does.

Perhaps if we begin sex education at 5, children will be over it by the time they’re 10 and be grizzled and put off by sex like an old married couple by the time they go to prom. It’s worth a shot.

6. Banning of Ethnic Studies

Recently, Arizona Governor Jan Brewer passed a bill banning ethnic studies in schools. This eliminates classes such as Latino Literature, or African American History, which had been taught in Arizona schools for years.

Arizona deporting a boatload of Irishmen to free-loving California, copyright June 2010

Many opponents of this bill of fail to see that eliminating these classes now makes room in the curriculum for more important and practical classes, such as White History, Caucasian Science and Master Race Phys. Ed.

Kudos to Arizona for expanding the horizon for all students… unless they are students of color, in which case they must drink from a separate fountain (located in New Mexico).

Bonus: This is one innovative cat