LETTERS: Adelson’s motives about money

To the editor:

Sheldon Adelson is at it again, spreading millions of his dollars around the country — if not the world — to nix Internet gaming. What a hypocrite and greedy person this gaming mogul is. Here’s a guy who has gaming facilities around the world and makes a large part of his income from the gambling public. Yet he says he doesn’t want Congress to legalize online gaming. Wow. Can you believe that?

Mr. Adelson knows the income from Internet gaming around the country will be in the billions of dollars each year, and it appears he wants those billions for himself and his gaming ventures. And get this, his reasoning for opposing online gaming in Nevada, New Jersey and elsewhere is by using that same old weary, beaten excuse: “It’s for the children.” It never ceases to amaze me that individuals, politicians and anyone trying to promote a cause always fall back on the “It’s for the children” scam. Mr. Adelson says he will be protecting children by not allowing online gaming. That’s a crock, and he knows it.

I think his sole reason for opposing online gaming is that he wants those billions flowing into his pockets. He knows children can’t gamble. He also knows that gaming boards and commissions in any state will have secure safeguards in place to prevent anyone under the age of 21 from gambling.

Mr. Adelson is just a sore loser. He hates to lose money to anyone. He will do and say anything to get out of giving up money — his recent court loses show proof of that, and his opposition to online gaming is just another one of his ploys to usurp money that he sees going elsewhere. And you wonder how Mr. Adelson got his billions of dollars? Guess.



Student loan program

To the editor:

Secretary of Education Arne Duncan is a loose cannon, judging by his recent remarks about suburban moms. But his arrogance aside, what he advocates is even worse and can be costly to the taxpayers, most notably the government’s takeover of student loans.

Mr. Duncan convinced former Chicago community organizer Barack Obama, now running the largest corporation in the world as United States president, to allow the secretary’s group of novices to manage direct takeover of a lending effort that requires a serious level of expertise. He convinced President Obama that the takeover of direct consumer lending by the U.S. government would eliminate the middle man. I am a former middle man who, along with thousands of loan officers working in small, medium and large banks across the country, managed a student loan portfolio.

Loan officers met with parents and students in their hometowns, face-to-face, taking applications and confirming college acceptance, preparing documentation, disbursing funds and maintaining files. Further, if we set up the repayment process and managed collections, we counseled students about money matters. We loan officers were paid modestly and at no cost to the government.

The student interest rate varied between 4 and 6 percent. The banks got some tax exemption because our depositors’ funds were employed at below-market rates. The government was called on to guarantee the loan’s payment only if the student defaulted and avoided all attempts to negotiate repayment.

So why the takeover, Mr. Secretary? What middle man was making millions? The local banks kept their loans for their own portfolio, the larger institutions sold theirs to the federally sponsored Sallie Mae. Further, how many warm bodies have you put on your empire’s payroll? How much money will be paid to high-grade contractors (whose skill at screwing the government is legendary) to do your collections, delinquency follow-up and the skip tracing?

Be aware, Secretary Duncan, that the student loan process is not a slam-bang, make the loan, the student graduates, payments are made promptly, no fuss, no muss situation. Nonsense. The economy fluctuates, jobs get scarce, adjustments are needed. What is easier: Dealing with a loan officer face-to-face at home, or dealing with a bureaucracy based in Washington, D.C., via computer?

There should be a congressional inquiry to determine if what Secretary Duncan has created is for the public good or another costly catastrophe.



F Street torture

To the editor:

It is now clear that the F Street project is a huge waste of millions of taxpayer dollars funneled to politically connected contractors to create daily commuter torture on Interstate 15 for an extended period of time into the future. All that so that those living in a particular neighborhood next to I-15 will have a slightly more convenient way to cross over to the other side of the interstate. Any benefits to be derived from this project are offset a hundred times over by all of the negatives.

Las Vegas is the entertainment capital of the world. I-15 is the lifeline of the Strip. The traffic delay alone is an unconscionable burden to place on commuters and supply trucking, not to mention tourists who might never return because of our self-inflicted chaos. The smooth operation of our city has been trashed. Who in government will be held accountable for this terrible decision? And why is it every time I creep past this project, there seems to be no one working?




To the editor:

How do the pathway-to-citizenship sycophants justify their support of this odious plan? It’s definitely not in the best interests of this country, nor fair to all the men and women from other countries using legal channels to enter the United States.

Most of the illegal aliens eagerly live in this country, are enjoying most of its benefits and really are not that concerned about citizenship as long as they don’t have to worry about deportation. It’s time to take away the benefits of those living in this country illegally. Then they will self-deport. Problem solved.



News Headlines
Local Spotlight
Add Event
Home Front Page Footer Listing
You May Like

You May Like