In the past I've reviewed/mentioned a couple of online personal finance sites that are attempting to turn the "wisdom of crowds"/social networking concept into profitable businesses: Mint and Wesabe. If you've tried these services, or if you like the idea of having your financial life organized online, you might be interested in another two entrants into this now-crowded field...

Rudder (see VentureBeat profile here) seems to offer something a bit unique in that once you get your finance accounts up and running, it keeps track of your bills and gives you daily e-mail updates on what payments are coming up and how much money you can expect to have available at any point in the near future (by subtracting upcoming bills from your current balance). I always prefer reminders that send me to a site versus visiting a site every day, so I can see the appeal in that.

Green Sherpa (see VentureBeat profile here) seems to be something of a "me too" application, with a few unique features. VentureBeat points out that it does a better job of offering manual inputs for cash spending than Mint does, for example. But it's trying to charge $7.95 per month while most of its competitors are free. People who like to manage their money online also like to not spend money to do it, so I'm guessing Green Sherpa will be changing that business model in a short time.

Check 'em out if online financial management tools are appealing to you.

I've been somewhat watching the national conventions the last couple of weeks. They are bizarre affairs, where a bunch of people get on stage and tell you why their candidate is so strong and fearless and is going to bring change and turn the town upside down. Then the candidate gets on stage and tells you the same thing. I watched last night and saw Mitt Romney act like a crazy caricature of a Republican (the liberals are coming! the liberals are coming!) and Sarah Palin prove that she's happy to be an Alaskan attack dog.

(For the record, I can not stomach the idea that this woman would be a step away from the presidency. I'd rather have the community organizer and, oh yeah, state and U.S. senator in charge, with a backup that has some real experience. Mayor of Wasila and two years as Alaska governor my butt. I might've voted for McCain before, or at least felt comfortable with him, but that Palin scares me way too much. Between her and McCain they'll have the whole world blown up within 2 years.)

Anyway, whatever your personal politics, I think it's fair to say that the tax issue is the biggest load of B.S. out there. Democrats say they're going to lower your taxes, Republicans say Democrats are going to raise your taxes, and I guess it goes without saying that the Republicans will lower your taxes, until of course they decide to raise your taxes. ("Read my lips, no new taxes.")

I don't believe anything any of them say, because I've now lived long enough to realize that campaign promises are made in a vacuum, as if the candidate just gets to wave a magic wand and say "more taxes" or "less taxes". In the real world, however, presidents propose some things, and Congress either agrees or disagrees, and then the lobbyists come in and tell Congress whether they should agree or disagree, and then Congress does everything they can to make it look like they're doing something when in reality they do their darnedest to gut any new law so that it has almost no power because that's the way the lobbyists want it, and if the lobbyists don't get what they want then the Congressperson will have a harder time getting re-elected, and that's the name of the game.

You could say I'm cynical.

My advice: don't vote for a candidate based on the issue of taxes unless you are filthy rich (in which case, vote Republican). Only the rich have a clear-cut choice, every one else gets a lot of promises that are unlikely to ever be kept. So, whether you want to help the homeless or stop abortion or let gays get married or drill for oil in Alaska or whatever your other causes are, vote based on those and leave the tax issue out of it. You'll save yourself a lot of heartache.

Southwest Airlines is going plastic-only starting September 9th:

Southwest Airlines wants you to keep your cash ... and hand over your plastic! No, Southwest is not adding new service fees, but beginning Sept. 9, all Southwest Airlines aircraft will be equipped with handheld credit card devices that will enable Flight Attendants to take drink orders in a flash, and accept credit and debit cards for payment of cocktails, beer, wine, and Lo-Carb Monster energy drinks. The airline will no longer accept cash onboard.

You may remember that Alaska Airlines just did the same thing. And US Airways has said it's their goal to go cashless next year.

Soon your cash will be worthless when airborne.

Kimberly Palmer had an interesting post last week about a Best Buy customer whose TV came out of the box broken:

So, as irritating as that would be, you would think that at least the store would exchange it for an undamaged one, right?

Wrong. When Jennifer took the television back to the store, customer service representatives told her the store could not replace it, because the company can't be responsible for what happens after products leave the store. Eventually, the store offered to pay for half of the repairs on the damaged television-which still leaves her out $500 and without the brand-new set she paid for.

Palmer went on to report that Best Buy will replace items that it delivers that are broken, but not items that the customer decides to transport.

Here was my comment to the post:

I think if it costs extra to deliver, then this is a horrible policy. If Best Buy was smart, they would simply take the hit when this happens, even if they believe the customer did the damage. The animosity they create by this policy probably costs them more in future sales than it would cost to simply replace the item - it's short-term thinking. Bad for the customer, bad for Best Buy.

A Best Buy employee defended the company with this reply:

I have worked for Best Buy for 8 years 6 of them in home delivery. I could count on two hands how many TV's came damaged out of the box. Its rare not impossible but rare. On the other hand I can't count how many times customers have brought there own products home and brought them back damaged saying it was like that in the box. Not one customer has ever confessed to damaging there product. Thats why Best Buy has this policy. If Best Buy would have returned the TV they would be in the same situation as Jennifer with the vendors. How do you prove who is responsible for the damage? Best Buy would have had to eat the loss. Its $1100 a tough loss for anyone. At leaast best Buy offered to meet them half way thats allot more than allot of other people or companys would do.

This person makes a couple of decent points, BUT I think what's most important here is that the customer has no incentive to purposely break an item, so there's no chance of someone "abusing" the refund policy. This can not be a massive problem for Best Buy. I have to believe it is a very small percentage of overall sales that come back looking for a refund due to damaged goods. Why risk the good will that a refund provides in order to save a little money in the short term? It's just not a smart policy for Best Buy.

I hear the voices...

Brip Blap:

I argue that for most people, college is a crutch. Their intellectual curiosity is sated by four years in college - they read, they take interesting courses, they graduate and 58% of them never read a book again. Bubelah thinks college is necessary for growth, and that college forces people to expand in ways they never would on their own. I say that college can only assist growth - intellectual curiousity, if someone has it, won't stop with college.

Princess Perky:

Look you don't even have to be here! Girl scouts is a decent program with wonderful goals designed to help girls with leadership and life skills, how exactly do you expect me to teach them if you don't want me to be anything more than an every other week drop off?

Good grief, I am so sorry I took on this role.

Don't Mess with Taxes:

It looks like the McCains violated the first rule of couple money management: Talk about your finances.

Even if you keep, for the most part, separate accounts, you still should know some basics about your spouse's finances. In the worst-case scenario, your spouse dies, leaving you with no knowledge of his or her accounts and at the mercy of outside financial advisers with whom you might not be familiar or comfortable.

So John and Cindy, I know things are a bit hectic right now, what with the republican convention coming up and that nagging VP decision still hanging out there, but make some time to talk about your money, OK?

Single Ma:

If you were in a relationship that wasn't defined and decided to go on vacation together - how often would YOU offer to share the expenses, if at all?

Good Morning America had an interesting little feature the other day. They asked a family - Mom, Dad, baby - to go without using any sort of money cards for a month - no credit, no debit, not even checks. Here's the story and video.

How'd they do? They say they saved $1800, spending 24% less than they normally would if they had access to their cards. According to my calculations, that means they would normally spend around $7500 per month and during the test month they spent $5700. That's a lot either way, so I'm guessing they were allowed to send in their mortgage payment by check - can you imagine sending a bundle of cash FedEx?

It's not surprising that they spent less, because making a purchase was more of a hassle than it would've been otherwise. Filling up the gas tank meant standing in line to pay, other times they simply didn't have the cash on hand to buy what they wanted so they just said "Forget it."

By the end of the story, the moral was that not using credit helped them to buy only what they really needed instead of impulse buys. They say they're going to stick with it and only use a credit card in an emergency.

I hope Good Morning America revisits them in a few months to see if they've really done it. I'm guessing they'll be back on the cards for convenience sake. But I'd also guess that they'll continue to curb their spending, at least in the short term, as they spend more time thinking about each purchase. Whether you are interested in swearing off credit or not, this could be a good exercise in learning to spend more thoughtfully.