In comes an orange haired older woman clanking the tile floor with each of her short shuffling little steps.  She looks annoyed, but who knows, maybe she always looks like that.  Before she even makes it to the bank teller’s window, the teller asks her how she is doing.

“Bad,” she blurts out.

Twenty years she has been banking here, and never has she been treated so badly.  Seems as though a check her husband wrote her from another bank cannot be immediately cashed without his signature verified.  Seems fair enough.  How would one reasonably expect someone to issue funds from another bank without verifying it first?

Not good enough for her.  The teller calls over her supervisor to see if they can help resolve this impending crisis.

Here comes the parts were you resolve to yourself that you are not leaving until you see this thing pan out.  The drive-through teller that started this mess, is also the supervisor.  She does what anyone in the service industry does and kindly greets the women.

“Don’t talk to me; I don’t want your slanted Korean eyes looking at me.”

WHOA!  Really, throwing around racial epithets in a place you have banked for twenty years, really classy lady.  Let us jump right to work and please you.  Because if we do not, you are going to close your account and take your business somewhere else.

How are you even supposed to fix a problem when the person with the issue does not want you to talk to them?  How do you resolve a predicament for someone who is more driven to shoot off inappropriate comments and talking points than let you help them?

Sure, those in the business of relying on others to turn them a profit want to make their customers happy.  However, sometimes one cannot help to laugh at the threat of, “I’ll take my business elsewhere.”  Especially, when they have made a scene, ruffled up other customers, and insulted employees on a personal level.  Maybe you should take your business somewhere else.  Maybe it is time more businesses take a cue from Sprint.

In 2007, the cell phone carrier, Sprint, let go of 1200 needy customers.  Apparently, they called too much, and were never pleased.  They were deemed a financial drain on the call center.  The company realized that having them as customers cost more than they were worth.

It is not to suggest that a business fires every disgruntled customer.  Employees who wait on customers are there to help make things right.  However, there comes a time in every customer service employee’s career, that instead of working off the time old business model of “the customer is always right,” that they should simply ask:

“Are large bills okay?” as they close the account.

“I couldn’t buy all the groceries I wanted this week because I’m tight on cash [due to the mortgage]. I had to put food back onto the shelf for the first time in my life because I couldn’t pay for it.”

The following quote was from an individual I had graduated and kept in contact with over the years. As we started our careers and families, people make different choices, but financial considerations need to be made before jumping into buying your first home.

Although the Federal Reserve in the United States has declared it will hold interest rates to historically low levels, the Bank of Canada increased interest rates on Tuesday by 0.25%. This is the first increase among all G7 countries and it means that payments on variable-rate mortgages will also go up.

In the meantime, Canada was also the only developed country in the world that had an increase in debt among individuals during the recession. Canadians have borrowed 142% of every $1 of disposable income earned with it expected to increase over the next few months. Compare this with 55% in 1955.

Why has this occurred? Mortgages rates, being at historical lows, was where the majority of debt was accumulated during the recession. Investors and first time buyers made residential purchases sooner before the new Federal mortgage regulations, interest rate increases and Harmonized tax rules became law.

With low interest rates, the Bank of Canada has commented on concerns that individuals were also using their home equity like ATMs. Families would consolidate existing consumer debt and take out equity from their homes to pay for everyday goods.

Families, already struggling to pay current debt obligations, will have further difficulties as interest rates increase on mortgages and lines of credit. Consequently, as more disposable income goes towards the mortgage, less is available for all other areas of life. Food included.

Although previous generations paid for goods in cash, the majority of purchases are now paid on credit. People go into debt because it adds zest in rather dull lives. The idea of a new car, boat, trailer or motorbike adds adrenaline to rather humdrum lives. Credit makes the difference between hoping and having. Why hope when you can have it now? We are in period where debt is rather fashionable than sinful.

At the moment, real estate is fashionable in Canada because the current generation believe that condominiums and homes will always be a-good-to-have investment and creation of personal wealth – regardless if it is using 35 year amortization periods or zero downpayments. You lose out if you do not own.

And perhaps this was why Canadians continue to accumulate debt. It is the belief – against reason – that it brings us closer to the idea of ‘having’ regardless of the long term costs or potential hardship. Kind of like, “I will gladly pay you Tuesday for a hamburger today.”

Has it become a sin to be living within your means, even if purchasing a new home and saving for an adequate downpayment will mean waiting? Does home ownership and stretched cash flows trump groceries?

As a rule-of-thumb, every 1% increase on a typical $300,000 mortgage requires a family to make an extra $10,000 of gross income a year.

With the trend of higher interest rates being projected into 2011, families need to be ready to manage their cash flows over the next few years. For first time home buyers, if affordability is an issue and contingencies can’t be made for higher interest rates, perhaps waiting (and saving) isn’t a bad idea.

Just ask my friend.

Let’s get serious about “Jobs, Jobs, Jobs.” Why is it that when people get fired too few of us actually care as to why the person was fired? Why are we so eager to move on instead of investigating the problem? We have a group of individuals “Chronically Unemployed.” Why are they unemployed? What did they do to get fired or “Left Behind.” We don’t leave anyone behind at war. Are we truly interested in fixing unemployment or are we just providing lip service? How much lipstick can we put on this unemployment pig?

To lower rates of unemployment, we must tackle the problem at the roots. Everyone undergoes a background check and the history revealed in your employment record is almost as important as your credit score. Anyone with unresolved employment disputes could be forced to compete at a tremendous disadvantage. This history never goes away and it is shared from corporation to corporation. We have a duty to get it right. The individual is powerless. He or she is unable to resolve the problem with any level of fairness. We are denying “Due Process.” An innocent and good person can be fired at will and left to survive at the mercy of their next employer. How many innocent people can’t pass an employment background check based on incorrect information? We don’t ask and the corporations don’t tell us. Due process is denied.

With any unresolved issue, the new employer can now be prejudiced by discovery. There is no mechanism to address controversial issues of the past. Individuals are marked with scarlet letters. Basically, innocent people can be forced to swim against a rushing tide that drowns them in debt as they lose the benefit of doubt. These individuals left behind become “Untouchable.” Plagued by their checkered past, they have no future and no chance to address the chronic situations that prevent future gainful employment opportunities. Untouchables form a solid core in unemployment that only inflate the numbers. Chronic problems prevent the real problems from ever being addressed. Employers can get away with murder and they often do. This encourages the unchecked practice. Society don’t care enough. We should go to war to fix the chronic problems. The “Untouchables” just disappear until all hope is lost. They resurface in the crime statistics.

If we are serious about improving unemployment in America, we must address “Chronic” and “Acute” unemployment from different perspectives. Chronic cases need interventions on a much greater level. Acute cases just need to find new opportunities quickly. Chronic unemployment needs more education, greater assistance, and advocates in the system to fight for them if they are ever to have the hope of productive employment again. Chronic cases don’t need jobs, they need opportunities to start businesses so they can be rehabilitated. We have a duty to ask, “Why?”

In short, instead of providing “Lip Service” we must go to war for these people to address rising unemployment. If someone did something that clearly earned this status, they know they have earned their negative status and must pay a price. They dig their way out like an ex-con after doing their time. Conversely, if we permit one innocent to be discarded, that’s a crime. We should go to war for them and address the real issues? Where can someone “Untouchable” get justice or a job? Dr. Martin Luther King Jr said, “To deny a person the right to work is telling them they have no right to live!” The death penalty painfully applies in employment. Some on this “Death Row” are innocent. America, this is a crime we can fix with a winnable war.

Sometimes I get these so called “Bright Ideas” in my head that should be shared with politicians and power. This is one I call “The American Dream Loan.” Basically, it’s a 15 year home loan program for the middle class that limits the amount of the loan repaid to a maximum of 50%. The government is the owner of the property and it permits the next generation to experience the American Dream. How does it work?

Homes ranging from 150K to 200K are aquired by the government and sold to credit worthy individuals trying to make the American Dream a reality. The amount of the loan is guaranteed by the property and the advantage of limiting the amount repaid is passed on to those most at a disadvantage in society. If a house is $150K the total loan repaid is $225K over 15 years. This payment of $1,250 a month is about what the average individual pays for rent. The government makes $75K and the individual gets the benefits of home ownership in 15 years or less.

In short, this competition in the banking industry gives a helping hand to the first time buyer and the poor. It permits the weakest individuals to establish credit and a chance to learn how the success game is played. It puts people into ravaged communities facing economic crisis. The program would require a financial mentor. This sounds to me like it could be a stimulus package for main street that prevents Wall Street from exploiting the weakest of the weak. I think it’s a “Game Changer.” What do you think? Do you want one? Wouldn’t it be great to know your children finally have an equal opportunity? Home ownership is “The American Dream.” We can if we truly want a successful future.

What more do I need to say about the stupidity of this ruling? To what end is our justice system now corrupt? When a corporation has the same rights as any individual, this so called justice is injustice. Our system is corrupt. How do we the people hold a corporation accountable? We don’t. We can’t. That’s what makes this ruling unconstitutional.

Before I say anything bad about this business, I invite you to visit “Shufflemaster’s” website for the indepth information and their baffling bull crap discussing the “elevator system” and a “Non-linear process.” While there check out what they say about the “I-Deal?” Let me paraphrase it now, “I-Deal includes card recognition technology that can read the rank and suit of each card. Wow! If a machine can determine the rank and suit of each card beyond the watchful eye of regulators; shouldn’t red flags be going up everywhere? My question is “Are continuous shuffle machines just a big hustle considered legal due to apathy in regulation?”

The heart of gaming is based on the integrity and strict regulation of the game. This machine attacks the heart of the industry, but it can be used to the casino’s advantage. How? In Blackjack, the casinos constantly cry about “Card Counting.” This is a form of “Expert Play” that takes advantage of information obtained during play based on the history of the cards in play. Let’s say many of the face cards have been played? The counter knows that little cards must follow so they adjust their bets accordingly and vice-versa. Continuous card shufflers were designed to foil the count. I’m wondering if the card shufflers have provided the house with an unfair advantage? If the technology exists to read the rank and file of the cards outside of the regulator’s eye, then that’s a huge advantage. Why?

In Blackjack, the house pays more if an Ace and Ten are dealt to the players and the house collects all bets if the dealer gets a natural 21 or Blackjack. The ability to manipulate the cards increases the house’s ability to collect if the cards can be read in advance outside the regulation of the camera. In simple terms this is cheating. Why? If players get good hands the dealer has the same opportunity. If players get bad hands, players must hit or stand on bad hands. This increase the opportunity for novice players to lose and lose more quickly. In short, this possible hidden advantage increases the house’s overall ability to win. The player is at a disadvantage if cards can be recognized and manipulated during play. A system that creates 19 elevator levels of cards is not actually continuous play. The possibility is lessened by grouping. If the grouping can be manipulated too, then the integrity of the game is in question.

In short, it is my humble opinion that the integrity of the game is in question; but the burden of proof for proving the technology actually cheats is too high for the average player to bear. How does one disprove a negative? If it is universally acknowledged that card recognition can easily be achieved by the technology readily available, then isn’t it the duty of the regulators to protect the integrity of the game by requiring the exclusive producer of this technology to be open to regulation by the camera? What began as an innocent “fix” to a major problem could have actually now “fixed” the game? I’ll let you decide if this is fair. I’m concerned for the future of all gaming. If a virtual casino is permitted and it is declared “legal” how does anyone know if the results are fair or not? Think of how much money changes hands by this technology? Think of the impact on Poker and Blackjack? I love Las Vegas and I’m afraid poor regulation or “looking the other way” could ruin the game. Where would Las Vegas be without gaming? My solution is “Open the face on all shufflers.” Let cameras regulate the games and the gamers.

AOL is changing their system in a way that I believe is censorship at it’s worst. I’ve been a member for a long time with my IP address and information available so I can be contacted if Big Brother needs to ask a few questions. What’s got me upset is they are now requiring more information to be shared just to offer a comment. I think this is censorship. Why should I give my private information just to talk if they have it already?

Preventing individuals from commenting on what they see is wrong. The conversation becomes very short and one sided. I think if I pay a fee to enter the net, then that fee entitles me to sound off on what I see. Requiring my personal information again is a form of discrimination, a personal risk, and censorship. I want to protect my identity as much as I can, but sharing my frank opinions is the reason I get the Internet. If I can’t feel safe, then my silence isn’t a good thing. My silence forces me back into isolation and that’s not good. My mouth is my uzi and it’s always locked and loaded. Without this protection, I’d really feel insecure. Trust me…I know what I’m talking about. Ranting about something is better than any confrontation for both parties.

Without the ability to protect my identity and to speak truth to power, in my mind I become a victim of the system. Unable to rage against the machine. Isolated in a world ready to discard my mind, body and soul. Where can I scream when I see the mainstream media brainwashing us all with Oprah and Obama? Precious was Porn! Who has the audacity to tell the Emperors they are nude? Demanding my name, zip code, birthday, and address is a tremendous security threat. Twitter has been hacked. The United States government spies domestically. I know what a “Sneak and Peak” actually feels like thankyou. I have given my information to the Internet provider so why must I now give it again for the right to speak? In short, that’s censorship and the easiest way to prevent real competition from bloggers. Telling the world where I am would be like Glenn Beck being forced to give his home address and phone number right after each show. That’s just stupid and an infringment on my free speech.

President Obama got elected by listening to “Little People” like me because I have the actual experience required to make a difference in broken systems all across America. I couldn’t get a capsule of penicillin when the Anthrax attacks were occurring and I’ve been unemployed longer than Sally Jesse Raphael and Al Gore combined. I hate unemployment because the system is built on failure to get a check. With the job summit about to focus on job creation, I think it would behoove President Obama to listen to these thoughts on unemployment.

First, nobody wants a hand out if they can do for themselves. The problem is “We Can’t!” We can’t force employers not to discriminate, to fire at will, or to be fair when confronted. Employees need “Advocates” with powers equal to the employer so problems can be mediated before workers are unfairly terminated. From an employer’s perspective, all complaints are “Childish Things” and “Petty Grievances.” If Obama wants to create jobs, he must first save those being lost to bad employers. Bad employers don’t create jobs, they employ people who know how to “Kiss Ass” and play the game.

Second, nobody wants to work for an employer that plays favorites unless that employer is giving “you” all the fringe benefits. Some employers have created a “Hostile Work Environment” that complicates doing the job. There are some high profile examples like The David Letterman Show and the Clinton White House. Monica Lewinsky was offered how much at Revlon for doing what to Bill? I’m for “Equal Opportunity”, but did these bosses ever let the entire staff know of these hidden positions for quick advancement? Employers aren’t being held accountable, but people are getting fired for speaking out.

Third, unemployment is like the “Economic Death Penalty.” Employees who are harshly terminated are on trial. The employer is the judge and the jury. Where in the world can an employee seek justice if the system is rigged from the hiring until the firing? We need “Advocates” with the power to fight for us. The entire “Unemployment System” is broken because there is no such thing as “Equal Opportunity” in a place turning a blind eye to justice for all.

In short, Unemployment is a broken paradigm because there’s no guarantee that one fired will ever get another job. The old statement, “You’ll never work again in this town” is horrifically true. Creating jobs is impossible where the laws are unfair and or uninforced. What’s created is a revolving door where you hope it doesn’t split you as you leave. The workplace becomes a Kingdom and the workers become “Slaves.” People don’t get hired again because they attempted “Regicide.” The Kings of Business tell other Kings and the workers with backbone are discriminated against in fear. How many others will be tossed aside, abused, or have their identity stolen? There’s no “Equal Opportunity” in a Kingdom.

Unemployment is based on hearing the “No.” Getting a job ends the cycle, but to get one the fired employee must rehash the last event for the next King. The employee never has a chance to clear up the problem and be Re-Employed. We must gear all benefits toward “Re-Employment.” We must investigate the situation for chronic flaws and substandard performances by the employer and employee. We must reward positive actions leading to re-employment, not those unfruitful searches leading to a paycheck. We must be advocates for the unemployed, not servants of an evil King. Equal Opportunity isn’t equal if the boss always wins. It’s easier to help people keep a job, than it is to create one for a person discarded like trash. The garbage must collect somewhere… and the days of collecting at the Unemployment Office should be over. Do something positive to get re-employed and then get paid. If a worker is as bad as the old employer says, then make that employer pay for screwing them up?

From the introduction, you can tell that I’m not a fan of the “Happens In Vegas” commercials. What I didn’t say was why. What’s wrong with such a catchy and funny commercial built on sexual innuendo and limited lunacy? Our new football team is called “Locos.” Think about it for a second? Maybe you’ll agree without too much persuasion? Our Mayor is the Martini Manager seeking a Mob Museum. What are we actually selling in Las Vegas and why is this commercial a success? What actually happens in Vegas? I don’t think this is a question that serves our future business interests? Are we selling the mob, martinis, or maniac sex?

What Happens In Vegas has generated a lot of buzz for the city. This can be a great thing or a terrible nightmare. Tourism is dropping and we keep going back to the same old message. We are selling the “Sizzle” and leaving it to the imagination of visitors to actually taste the “Steak.” What are we selling in Las Vegas? Everything here is a fantasy. This city can be quite ugly when the glitz, glamour and make-up comes off. Unemployment is rising with little hope of finding employment with your clothes on. With nothing actually being sold other than the chance of winning someday, the sizzle is wearing off. America wants to taste the beef. The sizzle doesn’t always bring them back, but a good taste will.

Vegas is a wonderful city and a golden opportunity for expansion and growth. Our problem is “We are operating on a dinosaur paradigm.” The paradigm is PT Barnum’s famous words, “There’s a sucker born every minute.” Las Vegas has no future if we are appealing to sexual deviants, suckers, and perverted politicians. The allusion created by the “Sexual Sizzle” is wearing off. In tough economic times, people want value for their entertainment dollar, not STD’s. I don’t think all the “Sizzle” is leaving America and or the World satisfied. How many people would actually think about coming to Vegas to see a Mob museum? Damn, that’s just poor leadership. Quick America, stand in line before you can’t get a ticket to see the wall Geraldo Rivera knocked down? Give me a break!

I’m high on the future of Vegas after I’ve seen the competition. I recently visited lovely San Diego and I’ll admit they actually have tremendous service. I don’t see them as a serious threat because they charge extra for parking even if you stay in a fine hotel. That’s stealing. It’s even a bigger turnoff than losing money in a casino. San Diego is all about quality service and upgrading shamelessly. The service is outstanding so they sell their “Steak” without the “Sizzle.” What’s San Diego’s “Steak?” They have a harbor and they sell the entire city collectively. Attractions don’t compete against each other. The city is connected by a trolly system, taxi cabs, and human powered bikes. Charging for parking could be a “Green Penalty” helping people actually see this lovely city? I left San Diego with a good taste of their steak in my mouth. It was expensive, but I got what I paid for. I will do it again, but it’s just not Vegas. I love Vegas.

In closing, I could care less about San Diego’s success or failure because I don’t live there. Again, I love Vegas and I’m sick of seeing the “Sizzle” let us “Fizzle” out of business. The advertising needs to change. Flying in a group from Texas to enjoy Vegas was a bad joke or possibly a political payoff? What Happens has generated all the positive buzz it ever will. It’s time for Vegas leaders like Steve Wynn to focus on our “Steak.” What are we selling in Vegas? Garth Brooks at a good price and dinner is a great start. How about a dinner tour of the city selling our signature dish-Rodeo Ribs and Ribeyes? How about a NASCAR package that actually takes people around the track for an experience in Vegas like never before? How about actually providing customers service and a chance to eat, drink, and be merry without using a car? It’s time to rethink the Vegas Experience. Why? “Sizzle” can make a Pavlovian dog drool, but a conditioned dog may bite if you fail to deliver. What Happens In Vegas should be “Second To None.” Am I crazy to want to actually deliver something we can all be proud of? Maybe if we offer value and good taste President Obama will encourage America to visit?

I’m mad as heck and there is usually a good reason for me to show my anger. I’m mad because someone just passed us a fake twenty dollar bill. There was nothing so obvious for us to question the bill, but when I tried to use it in a casino they instantly questioned it. It was like they printed it and they knew exactly what to look for. What happened?

The bogus bill was confiscated and I was instantly out of twenty dollars and treated like a felon. Through no fault of my own, I was accused of trying to pass on a counterfeit bill. I was livid because I just got robbed of twenty dollars. The casino told me that they had to send it to the FBI or Secret Service and that investigation had little or nothing to do with me. I was just the dumb sucker that they passed the bill to unknowingly. There ought to be a law to protect innocent citizens from getting duped like I did. The law should prevent any ATM from passing on bogus bills. Any bill in an ATM should not be ripped, torn, or bogus. The bank issuing them must be held accountable to the fullest extent of the law. All bills should be checked for authenticity at the time of the transaction to protect both parties. How many times has a bank or store questioned the authenticity of our money and did nothing to prove the authenticity of their change? There should be a law protecting “Legal Tender.”

In short, I had to provide my information to the Secret Service like I am the felon. I did absolutely nothing wrong with one exception…I trusted the ATM or casino’s change. It’s the holdiay season and we are spending money like someone has a printing press in their basement. Apparently, somebody does. We need to protect our cash and the integrity of our banking system before things get worse. I’m using the Citizen’s Journal to warn you. Nobody should live with the fear of visiting an ATM machine or a store and instantly losing cash. We must hold our banks and financial institutions responsible for the integrity of these bills. If you take them from us give us another and get the money from the Secret Service. If someone’s name constantly pops up, then visit them and look for a printing press. I understand the importance of confiscating bogus bills, but somebody needs to reimburse me for my loss. That bad bill is evidence in two crimes. Someone stole something from me and someone printed that bill. Why force innocent people to suffer this loss? More people would cooperate if we weren’t treated like felons. If it could happen to me…it could happen to anyone. I’m livid and I’m telling you to watch out for this counterfeit sh*&. I’ll stop ranting when the Secret Service gives me that twenty dollars back or lets me keep the bogus bill. I’ll frame it and make sure others learn from an innocent mistake. Protect us from ATM theft and encourage others to come forward. Don’t be the sucker caught by an ATM. It’s not funny but the money is.