<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8"?>
<rss version="2.0"><channel><title>Disqus - Latest Comments for pfstock</title><link>http://disqus.com/people/fb55479acada3b3ae1eae58e00f3e37a/</link><description></description><language>en</language><lastBuildDate>Fri, 24 Jul 2009 16:51:55 -0000</lastBuildDate><item><title>Re: What is Protected By the FDIC</title><link>http://consumerismcommentary.disqus.com/what_is_protected_by_the_fdic/#comment-21314907</link><description>Thank you for your response, and for your Email.  Actually, Bankrate's statement is an oversimplification.  I will contact them about their oversight, and have published a post that covers these issues in greater detail:&lt;br&gt;&lt;br&gt;&lt;a href="http://pfstock.blogspot.com/2008/08/caution-fdic-misinformation-is-rampant.html" rel="nofollow"&gt;http://pfstock.blogspot.com/2008/08/caution-fdi...&lt;/a&gt;&lt;br&gt;&lt;br&gt;The FDIC example is for a married couple with three children.  In this case, the FDIC insurance limit for this type of testamentary account is indeed $600,000.  However, the limit would vary based on the number of account owners and number of qualifying beneficiaries, so it isn't correct to make a broad generalization here.&lt;br&gt;&lt;br&gt;A qualifying beneficiary is required to setup such an account.  However, testamentary accounts are titled in this form: "Owner POD (payable on death to) Child".  Bankrate's article implies that the failure of a bank means that the money is automatically transferred to the the beneficiary (child in this case) when the FDIC insurance kicks in.  Your statement was "the insurance applies to the beneficiary, not the owner."  This is not true as the titling stipulates that the transfer only occurs after the death of the owner(s).&lt;br&gt;&lt;br&gt;Lastly, I think that readers who have a serious concern here should check with the FDIC to find out their own coverage, as everybody's personal situation is different.  This is a link to the FDIC's Electronic Deposit Estimator which will help determine one's coverage:&lt;br&gt;&lt;br&gt;&lt;a href="http://www.fdic.gov/edie/" rel="nofollow"&gt;http://www.fdic.gov/edie/&lt;/a&gt;&lt;br&gt;&lt;br&gt;I encourage readers to run their personal scenario through this calculator to be sure they are covered.</description><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">pfstock</dc:creator><pubDate>Thu, 21 Aug 2008 16:53:58 -0000</pubDate></item><item><title>Re: What is Protected By the FDIC</title><link>http://consumerismcommentary.disqus.com/what_is_protected_by_the_fdic/#comment-21314904</link><description>Hi Flexo: I have a statement and a question for you.  You said that "Couples can also set up a trust for children or another relative, insured by the FDIC up to $600,000."&lt;br&gt;&lt;br&gt;My statement is that your term "another relative" is vague.  The FDIC has very specific rules on who can qualify as a beneficiary.  For example, a grandchild, parent, or sibling can qualify.  However, nieces, nephews, in-laws, or domestic partners would not qualify.  I advise that readers should check with the FDIC for the specifics on who can be named as a beneficiary.&lt;br&gt;&lt;br&gt;My question is how did you come up with the $600,000 number?  I've read through much of the FDIC material, and didn't see this mentioned.  Could you cite a specific example?&lt;br&gt;&lt;br&gt;Thanks.</description><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">pfstock</dc:creator><pubDate>Wed, 13 Aug 2008 20:49:14 -0000</pubDate></item><item><title>Re: Irwin Union Bank is Giving Away Free HDTV and HD Camcorders</title><link>http://mbt.disqus.com/irwin_union_bank_is_giving_away_free_hdtv_and_hd_camcorders/#comment-13291167</link><description>I don't know of any banks currently offering a free toaster. In any case, has anybody gotten their HDTV yet? And how long does the whole process take?</description><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">pfstock</dc:creator><pubDate>Fri, 24 Jul 2009 16:51:55 -0000</pubDate></item><item><title>Re: Review: Money Plus 2008 (part 2) | Emad Ibrahim</title><link>http://emadibrahim.disqus.com/review_money_plus_2008_part_2_emad_ibrahim/#comment-1601639</link><description>Thank you for reading my blog, and leaving a comment on &lt;a href="http://pfstock.blogspot.com" rel="nofollow"&gt;PFStock&lt;/a&gt;.  Your review of MS Money Plus leaves me a bit disappointed.  I have bought a new copy of Money almost every year since 2002.  I use MS Money extensively for investments, but I use Quicken for my checking and bill payments.  I don't think that I would use the "Insights" very much, and most of the other "new" features are already available online from MSN Money.  That one new feature, attaching check images, has been in Quicken for a couple of years.&lt;br&gt;&lt;br&gt;But, I think that the larger issue is performance.  You stated that even on your super fast computer, Money is still slow.  Do you know if this is a Microsoft Money Plus issue, or a Windows Vista issue?  Oh, and could you clarify one more thing?  Does the activation scheme allow you to install MS Money Plus on more than one computer?  Given all that you've said, I may decide to forgo an upgrade this year...</description><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">pfstock</dc:creator><pubDate>Thu, 27 Sep 2007 18:16:40 -0000</pubDate></item></channel></rss>