Remember when you were 18? Were you good at handling money, shrewd at evaluating risk, able to keep your head while those around you were going crazy? Me neither. That's why I think the idea, floated by a lawyer for the gaming industry recently, to drop the legal gambling age to 18 in Las Vegas casinos is a big mistake.

The rationale is obvious; Vegas has been expanding right into the teeth of America's economic downturn, and it needs new punters with cash to spend and a poor grasp of probability, ones easily distracted by the hype and glitter. In tribal casinos in nearby California and Arizona, 18-year-olds are already allowed to squander their money gamble.

In my opinion, 18-year-olds are easy marks for the casinos, too easy; the phrase "taking candy from babies" comes to mind. How many earn enough money on their own to fund a gambling night, and how many would be playing with their parent's money? How many 18-year-olds could revel in the atmosphere of booze and sex without being tantalized by those adult recreations, as well?

If Vegas is desperate enough for money to look to the 18-21 crowd for help, it might want to think about canceling some of those expansion plans. The 18-21-year-old's have a lifetime yet to cultivate bad habits; don't rush them. Let them gamble on a college education, a career, marriage, children. Then, if they have anything left over, they can hit the tables in LV.

For a variety of reasons that have very little to do with an abiding interest in professional horse racing, I've been to the races quite a few times and in several different venues. My husband is from New York's North Country (that's about four hours drive north of "upstate" New York), and the historic Saratoga Race Course is on our route. We go sometimes. Also, we were put up in the Dover Downs Hotel & Casino when Mike was invited to the Delaware state book festival. And his prior day job held a summer outing for employees last year at the Belmont Park.

I've learned enough from these trips -- which have all included bringing my young children -- to proclaim with confidence that going to the races could be a fun, thrilling, even educational family outing. But first, the sport needs a radical makeover.

Foremost, gambling has to be taken off site. My husband tells me that without gambling there would be no professional horse racing, so I won't go that far (even though I think gambling is a vice that can be addictive and that is a regressive tax on the poorest people). But if people want to gamble, I think they can place their bets online or go to Vegas or to off-track gambling parlors. That would remove the aura of seedy desperation that some racing venues have.

Don't miss the rest of our series on Makeovers Needed!

While the real estate market goes soft in many areas and more and more Americans become two mortgage families it's no surprise that some sellers are looking for gimmicks to get their home off the market. The New York Times reports that some homeowners are shifting their attention from one buyer to thousands as they raffle off their homes. One couple who recently raffled off their home $100 at a time sold over 6,500 tickets and raised $200,000 more than their home was worth, which was donated to a local charity.

In case you're wondering what motivated the couple above to give away $200,000 after trying to sell their house for so long, a look at the restrictions on gambling in your state should clear this up. In most states you cannot raffle off real estate or land without a nonprofit partner and in New York you can't raffle a house at all so keep that in mind before you run out and stock up on raffle tickets.

What happens in Vegas may stay there, but these days, the problem is how to get there in the first place.

McCarran Airport, Vegas' major entry point, reported its biggest year-on-year drop since after 9/11. And Southwest Airlines, the rare profitable airline which recently said it wouldn't need to tighten its flight schedule, reversed course and said 13 flights, or about 5% of its Las Vegas seats, would be eliminated starting in January. Considering Southwest is one of the most reliable feeder of tourist traffic to the Strip, that's quite a blow.

To further put it in perspective, as of Sept. 2, Vegas had 81 flights from U.S. Airways daily. A year ago, it had 141.

The pain, though, is mostly for hoteliers and airlines. Tourists are starting to see a real benefit to the growing malaise. On Tuesday, Arthur Frommer wrote about seeing an ad for a two-night Planet Hollywood package for $149 per person that came with either $100 back or two free show tickets. When he called to book, he told the receptionist it was still too expensive. And just like that, he was offered the same deal for two people at $249 total. That's desperation.

Earlier this summer, casinos were low-balling tourists with archaic rates like $33 to $55 a room. Even now, prices on the Strip are sliding southward (the Sahara for $24, the Tropicana, $46, both quoted through a Hotels.com promotion) and rooms off the Strip are so low (like $20 at the Plaza Hotel off Fremont Street), they're virtually tragic.

The Indianapolis Star reports that a lawsuit filed against Indiana's Hoosier State Lottery has been granted class-action status.

The complaint alleges that lottery advertised over $8 million in prizes for its Cash Blast game from May 2005 to July 2006, even after the prizes had already been awarded. Indianians purchased more than $20 million worth of losing tickets during that time frame, and the suit seeks a refund for losing tickets sold.
Is it unfair? Yeah, probably. But with all due respect to the victims, it's a little bit like suing the perpetrators of one of those Nigerian email scams for lying about his name -- the Lottery is one of the stupidest things you can possibly waste your money on, and, even if the prize hadn't already been awarded, the odds of winning are so small that it's barely materially different from 0.

According to the Star, "Two men, Jeff Frazer, Carmel, and Jeff Koehlinger, Auburn, filed the suit in Marion County for their losses in the game. Frazer purchased $40,000 worth of the $10 tickets and Koehlinger bought $2,470."

That's just sad. If any good comes from the case, hopefully voters and elected officials will see the tremendous human cost of gambling, even when the game isn't rigged any more than usual. $40,000 worth of tickets -- and I doubt that he could afford it because anyone who could afford it wouldn't spend money that way.

In an effort to fund ever-increasing fiscal irresponsibility, the Florida Lottery announced that, in addition to the regular cash prizes, people who buy its "Summer Cash" tickets can also win one of 40 gas for-a-lifetime prize or 400 gas for-a-year prizes. The promotion started on June 30th and will continue through August 26th.

Seeing that this is a great way to increase sales, California State Senator Dean Flore, a Democrat, sent a letter to the California Lottery urging that the state run a similar marketing campaign. I'm tempted to send a letter to the Democratic Party demanding that it disown Flore, but that's another story.

Here's what's so messed up about the idea: it's designed to appeal to people desperately seeking relief from high gas prices and, mostly likely, that's not going to be the people earning $500,000 per year. Imagine the single mother who can barely afford to provide for her children stopping to fill up her tank on the way work: she's never bought a Lottery ticket in her life, but how could she help being lured in by the promise of free gas?

It's disgraceful that any state would exploit its most vulnerable citizens like this, especially in the name of education, which the lottery is used to fund. Students should be able to go to class without the knowledge that their history textbook was paid for with the blood of the desperate working-class.

Late on rent? Loan shark breathing down your neck? Can't fill your car with gas to get to work on Monday? Assuming all available funds and traditional sources of credit are tapped out, here are 25 (legal) ways to raise cash in a few days. We list them in order from least to most desperate.

Understand this first: this is our #1, most desperate way to make some quick cash, and only applies in this situation: you have some cash, but not enough, and MUST have more within a very short time or your life will fall into ruin. When you've exhausted every other possible avenue, only then does a reasonable man consider the casino.

Why is this our most desperate? Look at Las Vegas. Those beautiful building don't grow in place; they represent the house's advantage. Understanding this, what is you best play? If I were in this situation, what games would offer me the best shot at winning enough to save my butt?

Games I would avoid: slot machines, roulette, and other games that are 100% luck. The house advantage is considerable and unalterable. I would also avoid games in which I compete directly against other betters, such as poker. I'm not an experienced player, so the odds would be heavily against me.

I'd go with blackjack. A four-deck game gives the house only a .51% advantage, vs. 9-10% on the slot machines. I'd find a system to guide my decisions and bet strictly within those guidelines. This would give me as close to a 50% chance of winning as I'd be likely to find in a casino.

And, most importantly, I'd take this vow. Read it aloud with me. "I will quit the moment I have the money I need." I'd tattoo that on the back of my hand. If I'm down to our #1 way to raise cash in a hurry, I'm already playing long odds, and the rule of any casino is, if you play long enough, you'll lose. 100% guaranteed.

All 25 ways to raise quick cash.

It happens every year, and next week, it'll happen again, and if you're the manager or owner of a company, you may be wondering if you should let it happen: The March Madness office pool.

After all, if people are betting which of their favorite college basketball teams will destroy the others in order to become part of the NCAA's Final Four, then they aren't working. In fact, there's a loss of office productivity, and you're sanctioning illegal gambling. If you're a boss or manager, it's your duty, in fact, to step in and halt March Madness.

Just be willing to be strung up to a ceiling fan and left there to spin all day. And don't blame me. I'll deny every word of this article. In fact, the paragraph above this one? I didn't write it. I'm not sure who did.

This question comes up a lot as people find themselves regularly participating in the social ill of gambling. Most people lose far more than they win. That's why gambling is so stupid. But what if you "get lucky" and win a chunk of money. Do you have to report it? What if you've lost far more than you've won? Then do you have to report it?

The rules surrounding gambling are simple. Any money you win (from lotteries, raffles, horse racing, casinos, etc.) is taxable. The same goes for any prizes you win, such as cars, electronics, trips, or real estate. You may get a form W-2G to document your winnings, but even if you don't get one, you're responsible for reporting the gambling income.

Your gambling income goes on line 21 of Form 1040. Any gambling losses that you have documented can go on Schedule A of Form 1040. However, you can't deduct more than your gambling winnings. You have to keep accurate records of your winnings and losses. Most people don't seem to do that, but it's what the law requires. Be careful: This is a much-abused part of the tax code because most gamblers don't have records that support their deductions. Don't set yourself up to be audited.

More information can be found on gambling winnings and losses on the IRS website.

Tracy L. Coenen, CPA, MBA, CFE performs fraud examinations and financial investigations for her company Sequence Inc. Forensic Accounting, and is the author of Essentials of Corporate Fraud.

The Borgata Hotel Casino & Spa, the swankiest casino in Atlantic City, recently got a slap on the wrist for allowing underaged gambling.From the AP:

For more than a year, the teenager lived the life of a high roller at the Borgata Hotel Casino & Spa, buying tens of thousands of dollars worth of gambling chips, and earning more than $1,000 worth of free
merchandise and services for the level of his Blackjack and poker play.

But what the casino didn't know - and didn't ask about for more than a year - was that he was only 19, two years below the legal gambling age in Atlantic City.

For that reason, the state Casino Control Commission on Wednesday hit the Borgata with the largest fine it has ever levied for underage gambling: $105,000. ...All told, the commission handed out $231,000 in fines to three casinos for letting underage patrons gamble or drink on their premises.

This is an unbelievably lenient fine. Didn't anyone think to check this kid's ID before they lavished perk after perk on him? The Philadelphia Inquirer quoted a flack from the state Division of Gaming Enforcement as saying the youth had "extensive contact with Borgata employees." Either the workers didn't know or more likely didn't care that he was underaged.

Studies have found that between 86% and 93% of youth had gambled at least once in their lives. Casinos draw young people like moths to a flame, and since penalties are so lenient there is little reason for them to take underaged gambling seriously.

And you thought the blasting radio in the taxi could get annoying. Gambling site 888.com has plastered 375 London cabs with its logo, and according to the New York Times, taken it to the next level with 10 of those cab drivers: "The drivers may seek to engage passengers in conversation about poker. If customers take the bait, the drivers try to steer the conversation gently toward 888.com. Those who show particular interest may be given coupons offering free hands of virtual cards - worth as much as $10 - on the poker site."

Advertising dollars spent on word of mouth pitches grew 38% in 2007 to $1.35 billion.

Maybe I'm a hopeless romantic, but I actually kind of enjoy the idea of being able to have mindless conversation with a stranger whom I will never see again -- without them trying to sell me something.

Like most personal finance writers, I don't think gambling is something people should be doing -- Studies have shown that those who play the lottery tend to be the people who can least afford it. But if you have an insatiable desire to blow money on games of chance where the odds are hopelessly stacked against you (and are too smart to try day trading), I would suggest bingo.

Why? Because it involves sitting there for awhile and slows down the rate at which you can blow money. Playing the Lottery is like throwing a few dollars out the window -- at least with bingo, it takes awhile to lose your money. And if you can find a really gross bingo hall -- filled with cigarette smoke and body odor -- that's even better. You'll be miserable and won't be tempted to play for very long. Also, restrict yourself to one or two cards at a time.

A piece in the Wall Street Journal takes a pointless but entertaining look (subscription required) at The Bingo Bugle, a newspaper of sorts distributed at bingo games. You have to think this is the kind of journalism that will be on the chopping block once Rupert gets around to shaking up the paper.

I've never understood the rationale behind the Lottery. If gambling isn't a bad deal for society, then why isn't it legal? And if it is bad for society, then why is the state using it as a revenue source? It looks like the cops busting up backroom card games aren't promoting law and order: They're protecting a state-run monopoly.

Even if you accept the idea that the Lottery isn't inherently exploitative of those who can least afford it, I hope you'll agree with me on this: A $50 scratch ticket is insane and extremely exploitative. But today's New York Times reports on the rise of scratch tickets priced at $20 or higher and Texas, the state where everything is bigger, has a $50 scratch ticket -- The $130 Million Spectacular.

Of course, all lotteries urge people to "please play responsibly". But I have to wonder: How many people are in a position where it is responsible for them to buy $50 Lottery tickets, especially in this period of record foreclosures and soaring consumer debt in the face of a sub-zero savings rate.

A lot of people are worried about what their children see on television: sex, violence, drugs, vulgar language, etc. But one show that no child (or anyone else) should see appears on TLC of all places: Lottery Changed My Life.

The show profiles Lottery jackpot winners and what they've done with their money. Not surprising, many of the winners were living in very modest circumstances before they won -- exactly the people who could least afford to be playing the lottery and yet comprise a disproportionate percentage of the country's problem gamblers.

Lottery winners are not people who should be glorified: We should save television profiles on people who worked hard to better themselves and their children.

Maybe TLC, the channel that features such shows as Flip That House, feels a little shame itself? The show isn't mentioned on its website at all. Hmmm.

Here's a show I'd like to see on TLC: a show profiling the lives of families ruined by problem gambling, and children lacking clothes for school because their parents bought Lottery tickets instead. There are a lot more of these situations than there are jackpot winners, and that's the cost of state-sanctioned gambling that politicians need to be looking at. Maybe documentary filmmaker Jeffrey Blitz will bring us something worth watching.