I have a huge pet peeve! Welfare. Now please don't misunderstand me, welfare, food stamps and the like are all very important programs for those that are not well off and need a little bit of help. I have no problem with this. I used food stamps when I was in NY for a short time as a matter of fact.
No, the issue I have with some people that ask the government for financial help is that they get approved for it, but there is no way to keep them from using for things they absolutely don't need to be buying while they are in the situation they are in. There are two prime examples of this.
First example is lottery tickets. When you are on financial subsidies you do not need to be buying lottery tickets. They are expensive, they largely do not win and if they do win a major amount you have to report that to the government, and you're probably going to lose your benefits anyway. Granted you may lose your benefits for winning a large amount of money, but at the same time those benefits are not granted to a person so they can buy lottery tickets as what in their mind may be their plan for getting out of the hole.
Huffington Post did an amazing article about lottery tickets this morning that got me thinking about this again. In that article it talked about a newly drafted piece of legislation that would ban welfare recipients from spending government granted money on lottery tickets. State House majority leader Paul Stam states "We're giving them welfare to help them live, and yet by selling them a
ticket, we're taking away their money that is there to provide them the
barest of necessities" and called it essentially a scam and the advertising for the North Carolina lottery "just fraudulent"
Now, anyone that knows me well enough knows that I have a real issue with the GOP in general because of their outrageous ideas on things like Gay Marriage, Women's reproductive rights, money handling (trickle down economics) and so forth. This is one of those rare times where I have to stand up and applaud a member of the GOP for getting something right!
Now understand where I'm coming from here. I'm just coming out of working in a part of the retail industry where convenience stores and gas stations live. As a cashier I had to watch as people used food stamps, rather irresponsibly considering how expensive convenience stores tend to be, on things they didn't need to begin with.
I have twice seen people come in with their children and lay down several hundred dollars on nothing but scratch off lottery tickets, power ball and mega millions and whatever other lottery happened to be available at the time. In both those instances, both people were parents, had one or more of their kids with them and refused to buy them even a healthy apple, or a small bag of chips because they "didn't have enough money for that"
You bloody idiots. You have the money for that! You're just more interested in maintaining your daily greed habit, than using the money that we workers are paying into the welfare program with our taxes, be it a small amount.
there is another pet peeve where this is concerned. Alcohol and Cigarettes. I cant tell you how many people Ive seen either be on food stamps buying 50 or more dollars in Cigarettes at a time per week (regular customers for the win) or buying similar amounts of alcohol...or both. I nor anybody else, are paying our taxes so that people can maintain these dirty habits that they should be quitting.
I'm going to go a step further. I think that Lottery, Cigarettes, booze of any kind, should be something that people are not allowed to purchase if they are on government help programs. I think that what North Carolina is doing is a great and smart idea. I just don't think it goes quite as far as it should.
Welfare abuse is way too widespread. Its really time someone do something to work the problem out. I understand people are hurting. Hey, pound for pound so am I. That's no reason to misuse whats given you
Monday, January 28, 2013
There really IS an ap for that!
That's the joke and until recently I thought it was a pretty cool joke because of all the endless useful apps in google Play alone! But as the joke goes, There really is an app for that...and size does matter!
So since November of 2012 there there has been an app called "Penis and Condom Size". It was released November 8th 2012 by VSM Enterprises, LLC and costs 99 cents in the Google Play store. What does it do? Well according to the app itself it gives results varying from a recommended condom size to brand recommendations.
the thing that caught my attention most is the fact that you can rank your little one up against the rest of the smart phone world who also uses the app. This could go either way very quickly.
I see a fundamental problem with this whole idea. Fist of all, it comes with a ruler so you can measure your member fully erected...and I'm not seeing a lot of people holding their phone up to that and then making a call.
Second of all, comparing and classing members like that is just plain childish. I mean this is great for teenagers who think that's what the world is made of. Adults...seriously, you should know your condom size and where comparing yourself to everyone around the world like that, its not necessary.
Once again the app costs 99 cents in the Google Play app store. It is available through the Apple app store as well but I am unsure of the price.
So since November of 2012 there there has been an app called "Penis and Condom Size". It was released November 8th 2012 by VSM Enterprises, LLC and costs 99 cents in the Google Play store. What does it do? Well according to the app itself it gives results varying from a recommended condom size to brand recommendations.
the thing that caught my attention most is the fact that you can rank your little one up against the rest of the smart phone world who also uses the app. This could go either way very quickly.
I see a fundamental problem with this whole idea. Fist of all, it comes with a ruler so you can measure your member fully erected...and I'm not seeing a lot of people holding their phone up to that and then making a call.
Second of all, comparing and classing members like that is just plain childish. I mean this is great for teenagers who think that's what the world is made of. Adults...seriously, you should know your condom size and where comparing yourself to everyone around the world like that, its not necessary.
Once again the app costs 99 cents in the Google Play app store. It is available through the Apple app store as well but I am unsure of the price.
Saturday, January 26, 2013
Star Wars: Return of the Lego
A Long Long time ago in a galaxy Far Far Away...there was Lego's. And the great god Lucas shined down on Lego's and said "you may create and manufacture Lego likenesses of my creations." And Lucas and Lego beheld their creation and, look! It was very good! and there came to be profit for both parties, and both parties were pleased.
OK enough with the dramatic. So Lego, of course, has a standing contract with George Lucas to create recreations of recognizable landmarks, vehicles and characters from all parts of the Star Wars Movie franchise. Well now they have a new Star Wars Lego set that's hit the markets that has some people...more than a little upset.
So the Lego product in question is a recreation of Jabba The Hutt's palace from Star Wars Episode VI: Return of the Jedi. The complainers? Some Turkish unnamed leaders. and are saying that a watchtower and model of Jabba the Hut's palace are in fact exact replicas of the Hagia Sophia in Istanbul and the mosque Jami al-Kabir in Beirut - and of a minaret.
Some of the other complaints about it is that the characters look evil and that Jabba the Hutt likes to smoke a hooka (or water pipe as the Austrian times calls it) and have his victims killed. the Austrian times even refered to Jabba as a terrorist. Added to the list of laughable charges are: Shocking red and black devil's scowl (Darth Maul from Episode I), the palace is populated by criminals and has a machine gun and since in thier mind its modled after after this mosque, its sacraliage to have those two things included, and slamming the toy maker for contexual errors and that they toy was aimed at indoctrinating children against Muslims and a whole gambit of ridiculous claims that they say back up thier charge.
OK so, what incredibly stupid people we are dealing with here! First of all, Jabba's Lego Palace is based of the palace as it appeared 30 years ago in 1983. If this is such a problem now with the Lego set, why wasn't it a problem then with the movie itself? I would have thought that people this picky and over the top would have "caught on" to this seemingly racist hit to thier culture, which of course its not. So you waited 30 years after the movie was released world wide for the Lego toy to come out to complain?
And by the way, Jabba is not a terrorist, he is a kingpin of a smuggling operation which is why he wanted Han Solo so badly because he kept dropping his shipments and owed him money because of it.
I have never delved deeply into the character make ups, but in a movie like Star Wars there is always a clear line between bad guy and good guy. If there isn't then the movie really makes no sense. This is in no way a claim, accusation or god forbid a lawsuit that should even be remotely taken seriously.
If they want to have a real dialogue about an actual legitimate problem, how about talking about the shameful demeaning way you treat women for starts? But don't come up with these bullshit weak complaints about a toy based off a movie that, in reality you just simply don't like.
Original Story found on Huffington Post Here and the Austrailian Times story found Here
OK enough with the dramatic. So Lego, of course, has a standing contract with George Lucas to create recreations of recognizable landmarks, vehicles and characters from all parts of the Star Wars Movie franchise. Well now they have a new Star Wars Lego set that's hit the markets that has some people...more than a little upset.
So the Lego product in question is a recreation of Jabba The Hutt's palace from Star Wars Episode VI: Return of the Jedi. The complainers? Some Turkish unnamed leaders. and are saying that a watchtower and model of Jabba the Hut's palace are in fact exact replicas of the Hagia Sophia in Istanbul and the mosque Jami al-Kabir in Beirut - and of a minaret.
Some of the other complaints about it is that the characters look evil and that Jabba the Hutt likes to smoke a hooka (or water pipe as the Austrian times calls it) and have his victims killed. the Austrian times even refered to Jabba as a terrorist. Added to the list of laughable charges are: Shocking red and black devil's scowl (Darth Maul from Episode I), the palace is populated by criminals and has a machine gun and since in thier mind its modled after after this mosque, its sacraliage to have those two things included, and slamming the toy maker for contexual errors and that they toy was aimed at indoctrinating children against Muslims and a whole gambit of ridiculous claims that they say back up thier charge.
OK so, what incredibly stupid people we are dealing with here! First of all, Jabba's Lego Palace is based of the palace as it appeared 30 years ago in 1983. If this is such a problem now with the Lego set, why wasn't it a problem then with the movie itself? I would have thought that people this picky and over the top would have "caught on" to this seemingly racist hit to thier culture, which of course its not. So you waited 30 years after the movie was released world wide for the Lego toy to come out to complain?
And by the way, Jabba is not a terrorist, he is a kingpin of a smuggling operation which is why he wanted Han Solo so badly because he kept dropping his shipments and owed him money because of it.
I have never delved deeply into the character make ups, but in a movie like Star Wars there is always a clear line between bad guy and good guy. If there isn't then the movie really makes no sense. This is in no way a claim, accusation or god forbid a lawsuit that should even be remotely taken seriously.
If they want to have a real dialogue about an actual legitimate problem, how about talking about the shameful demeaning way you treat women for starts? But don't come up with these bullshit weak complaints about a toy based off a movie that, in reality you just simply don't like.
Original Story found on Huffington Post Here and the Austrailian Times story found Here
Friday, January 25, 2013
Recess Appointments and the Federal Court
So from New Mexico's Womens Rights issues strait to Washington, President Obama's recess appointments to the National Labor Relations Board have been brought into question and was examined by a Federal appeals court. The court ruled in favor of the plantiffs, stating that the appointments were unconstitutional because even though the Senate was away on vacation it was technically still in session because lawmakers gaveled in and out every couple of days during that time...
How many people think that the GOP did this on purpose? Always finding ways to prevent Obama or anyone else they disagree with from actually getting things done that clearly needs to be done. And of course the GOP's reason for challenging the appointments? Oh well, the agency these people appointed are pro union and unions are bad.
Of course they are...that's why they must be stopped. How dare they seek fair employment practices and policies! Don't they know that they are supposed to stack the cards against the little guy so these company owners can continue to get rich off the work of these people. fair treatment indeed.
That's the problem with a lot of these big businesses that keep trying to eliminate things like Unions. Unions are not a bad thing, in fact, when approached properly, they actually benefit workers very much. It keeps them from working for a pittens wage, they procure better benefits and better working conditions. But this is exactly why big business villainies them. They don't want to pay those kinds of wages, or give them any kind of fair treatment. That costs them money...a small fraction of their money mind you, but it still costs them, and they don't want to put even a dime extra out.
A fantastically blatant example of this extreme aversion to unions is the biggest retailer and job provider in the world...Walmart. Walmart Super Centers in of themselves typically employ somewhere between four hundred to five hundred people. Thad's a lot and if you take into consideration all of their stores country wide. A number that I saw places their employees at two million give or take. Personally, I think that deserves some kind of representation of the union kind!
But what does Walmart do? If you even mention the word union they will probably fire you. They've even been known to shut down whole locations (one in New Jersey for instance) if there is enough people in a store talking about a trying to form a union. The company even has a private jet on standby so they can fly to the location and conduct investigations and root out the subversive influences and get rid of them.
Now why do I keep talking about Unions? Because that's what the GOP directly pointed at when challenging the recess appointments that President Obama made. therefore it only makes sense that we focus on Unions and their roll in this situation.
Really all this situation is, in reality, an attempt to do away with unions all together. We've seen it happen on the state level in Wisconsin, the GOP would LOVE to see it happen nation wide. Lets hope that doesn't happen because if it does it will turn into even a worse free for all than it already is.
How many people think that the GOP did this on purpose? Always finding ways to prevent Obama or anyone else they disagree with from actually getting things done that clearly needs to be done. And of course the GOP's reason for challenging the appointments? Oh well, the agency these people appointed are pro union and unions are bad.
Of course they are...that's why they must be stopped. How dare they seek fair employment practices and policies! Don't they know that they are supposed to stack the cards against the little guy so these company owners can continue to get rich off the work of these people. fair treatment indeed.
That's the problem with a lot of these big businesses that keep trying to eliminate things like Unions. Unions are not a bad thing, in fact, when approached properly, they actually benefit workers very much. It keeps them from working for a pittens wage, they procure better benefits and better working conditions. But this is exactly why big business villainies them. They don't want to pay those kinds of wages, or give them any kind of fair treatment. That costs them money...a small fraction of their money mind you, but it still costs them, and they don't want to put even a dime extra out.
A fantastically blatant example of this extreme aversion to unions is the biggest retailer and job provider in the world...Walmart. Walmart Super Centers in of themselves typically employ somewhere between four hundred to five hundred people. Thad's a lot and if you take into consideration all of their stores country wide. A number that I saw places their employees at two million give or take. Personally, I think that deserves some kind of representation of the union kind!
But what does Walmart do? If you even mention the word union they will probably fire you. They've even been known to shut down whole locations (one in New Jersey for instance) if there is enough people in a store talking about a trying to form a union. The company even has a private jet on standby so they can fly to the location and conduct investigations and root out the subversive influences and get rid of them.
Now why do I keep talking about Unions? Because that's what the GOP directly pointed at when challenging the recess appointments that President Obama made. therefore it only makes sense that we focus on Unions and their roll in this situation.
Really all this situation is, in reality, an attempt to do away with unions all together. We've seen it happen on the state level in Wisconsin, the GOP would LOVE to see it happen nation wide. Lets hope that doesn't happen because if it does it will turn into even a worse free for all than it already is.
GOP And Womens Rights
Its pretty well known that the Republican party absolutely hates women having rights. In fact so much do they hate it that giving women any rights is like them crying "See? See? We give women rights too!" Only...when it comes to their personal religious beliefs they turn out to be some of the most ignorant oppressive people on the planet!
Rep. Cathrynn Brown (R), who is one of the state Representatives in New Mexico, has introduced a bill into the state senate that would further diminish women's reproductive rights, which the GOP is huge on by the way, in the case of violent sexual crime committed against them.
quote: "Relating to criminal law; specifying the procuring of an abortion as tampering with the evidence in cases of criminal sexual penetration or incest". Tampering with the evidence of course is among other things, defined as "destroying, hiding or changing" the physical evidence to prevent the apprehension of the offending party.
So there you have it! "you've been raped? What a horrible situation, its got to be hard for you! Lets put this guy behind bars so you get closure and he cant ever do this again. By the way...you still have the resulting fetus right? No? Bad news..there is nothing we can do for you. Worse news, you're going to jail for 3 years. Sad day for you."
Now this shouldn't come as a surprise. The GOP is constantly trying to find ways to take reproductive rights away from women and this is just another attempt. One that hopefully doesn't pass, we will see. But I find it so funny that the GOP constantly yelps and screams about the so called "Liberal Agenda" which by the way helps a lot of people in the long run, but then tries to push their religious ideology on others through politics and legislation.
Lets face it. The fight over whether abortion is acceptable socially or not is not an argument that's born from medically sound science. Its a pure assault on humanity by religious fundamentalists. Somehow in their heads because they believe in this invisible sky god from wherever, that means that everyone else should and dammit if you're not following that little black book then they are damn well going to make you through legislative action.
Looks like they skipped over the part of the constitution that states very clearly, raising no question as to what it means. It reads: "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof" As they are continuously trying to pass such laws they are violating that amendment left and right. Clearly the constitution is not nearly as important to them as they try to make out.
If you want to read the bill in full yourself go to Here to read the full document as submitted in New Mexico
Rep. Cathrynn Brown (R), who is one of the state Representatives in New Mexico, has introduced a bill into the state senate that would further diminish women's reproductive rights, which the GOP is huge on by the way, in the case of violent sexual crime committed against them.
quote: "Relating to criminal law; specifying the procuring of an abortion as tampering with the evidence in cases of criminal sexual penetration or incest". Tampering with the evidence of course is among other things, defined as "destroying, hiding or changing" the physical evidence to prevent the apprehension of the offending party.
So there you have it! "you've been raped? What a horrible situation, its got to be hard for you! Lets put this guy behind bars so you get closure and he cant ever do this again. By the way...you still have the resulting fetus right? No? Bad news..there is nothing we can do for you. Worse news, you're going to jail for 3 years. Sad day for you."
Now this shouldn't come as a surprise. The GOP is constantly trying to find ways to take reproductive rights away from women and this is just another attempt. One that hopefully doesn't pass, we will see. But I find it so funny that the GOP constantly yelps and screams about the so called "Liberal Agenda" which by the way helps a lot of people in the long run, but then tries to push their religious ideology on others through politics and legislation.
Lets face it. The fight over whether abortion is acceptable socially or not is not an argument that's born from medically sound science. Its a pure assault on humanity by religious fundamentalists. Somehow in their heads because they believe in this invisible sky god from wherever, that means that everyone else should and dammit if you're not following that little black book then they are damn well going to make you through legislative action.
Looks like they skipped over the part of the constitution that states very clearly, raising no question as to what it means. It reads: "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof" As they are continuously trying to pass such laws they are violating that amendment left and right. Clearly the constitution is not nearly as important to them as they try to make out.
If you want to read the bill in full yourself go to Here to read the full document as submitted in New Mexico
Thursday, January 24, 2013
Kids With Guns...In Schools
Just when you thought that GOP members couldn't make themselves look any worse than they already do...one of them finds a way to lower the bar even further. Today's goofball? South Carolina lawmaker Senator Lee Bright.
Our dear Mr. Bright has an interesting idea bouncing around the air pocket that passes for his brain. Lets not only allow our high school students be armed...but lets also teach them how to use them efficiently. His theory is that the more armed people in proximity of a potential shooter will prevent something like Sandy Hook from happening again.
How monumentally stupid are these people? First it was "lets put guns in the hands of the teachers", which is a terrible idea to begin with. Now they are seriously considering putting guns into the hands of children? Really? Just looking at both of these concepts makes my brain hurt.
So lets take the idea of arming the teachers for a moment. Gunman breaks into a school in anywhere USA intending to shoot it up, repeat performance of the mass school shootings of the past. The teachers are armed. Who in the hell do you think the first person getting shot is? Of course the teachers, obviously...which then leaves the shooter to go on an even worse spree because he shot the people that could have stopped him immediately. Then we end up with a lot of dead teaching staff and a worse massacre than Sandy Hood for instance.
Of course that logical and the GOP does not want you to think logically, It just wants you to follow their nonsense blindly. Someone comes up with this point and the GOP goes "How dare you make a valid point that contradicts our donors beliefs. You shouldn't do that."
Then...It of course gets worse. Arming children. Yeah they are in high school. OK...does no one else see an inherent problem in this. Columbine ring any bells? Were they not teenagers. Now in that case Eric Harris and Dylan Klebold, the two alleged shooters, were going to high school. Its bad enough that the GOP wants to arm teachers but do they really want to make another Columbine super easy to repeat? That begs the question...does the GOP really want to encourage an availability that would exacerbate the current problem and make it worse?
I just cant get over how monumentally stupid these people are!
Now from what Ive seen there is no response from the precious NRA and their gun manufacture donors...yet. I can only imagine how they are secretly reacting though. "Oh my god...they want to arm the children in these schools now. Oh...My...GOD!!! More gun sales for the manufacturers! YES!" Now don't get me wrong...I hope that the NRA is at least smarter than to buy in to the nonsense that Representative Bright is spewing. But given their history I'm not betting on it.
It would be a step in the wrong direction if this actually happened. We need better and reasonable level headed gun control in this country. To move in a direction that would result in anything less would be suicide of sorts.
Our dear Mr. Bright has an interesting idea bouncing around the air pocket that passes for his brain. Lets not only allow our high school students be armed...but lets also teach them how to use them efficiently. His theory is that the more armed people in proximity of a potential shooter will prevent something like Sandy Hook from happening again.
How monumentally stupid are these people? First it was "lets put guns in the hands of the teachers", which is a terrible idea to begin with. Now they are seriously considering putting guns into the hands of children? Really? Just looking at both of these concepts makes my brain hurt.
So lets take the idea of arming the teachers for a moment. Gunman breaks into a school in anywhere USA intending to shoot it up, repeat performance of the mass school shootings of the past. The teachers are armed. Who in the hell do you think the first person getting shot is? Of course the teachers, obviously...which then leaves the shooter to go on an even worse spree because he shot the people that could have stopped him immediately. Then we end up with a lot of dead teaching staff and a worse massacre than Sandy Hood for instance.
Of course that logical and the GOP does not want you to think logically, It just wants you to follow their nonsense blindly. Someone comes up with this point and the GOP goes "How dare you make a valid point that contradicts our donors beliefs. You shouldn't do that."
Then...It of course gets worse. Arming children. Yeah they are in high school. OK...does no one else see an inherent problem in this. Columbine ring any bells? Were they not teenagers. Now in that case Eric Harris and Dylan Klebold, the two alleged shooters, were going to high school. Its bad enough that the GOP wants to arm teachers but do they really want to make another Columbine super easy to repeat? That begs the question...does the GOP really want to encourage an availability that would exacerbate the current problem and make it worse?
I just cant get over how monumentally stupid these people are!
Now from what Ive seen there is no response from the precious NRA and their gun manufacture donors...yet. I can only imagine how they are secretly reacting though. "Oh my god...they want to arm the children in these schools now. Oh...My...GOD!!! More gun sales for the manufacturers! YES!" Now don't get me wrong...I hope that the NRA is at least smarter than to buy in to the nonsense that Representative Bright is spewing. But given their history I'm not betting on it.
It would be a step in the wrong direction if this actually happened. We need better and reasonable level headed gun control in this country. To move in a direction that would result in anything less would be suicide of sorts.
Michelle Obama Rolls Her Eyes...The Media's Collective Head Explodes!
Oh there it is! Apparently a cardinal sin among those who saw it. So the set up here is, after the inauguration, the President and the First lady (and this is very standard for new or second term Presidents) Have lunch with the opposing party leaders, in this case the Republican party.
Its this is a situation where no one really knows what was actually said. There is one theory that GOP Representative John Boehner said something that the First Lady was wholly unimpressed with. That source, as reported by The Huffington Post, is a lip reader and believes that the comment made by Rep. Boehner had to do with President Obama and having a cigarette (which I was surprised to learn that he had been a smoker...good for you for quitting Mr. President!). If correct, this lip reader also said that a comment was made in that dialog that indicated that Michelle wouldn't let him.
So lets assume that was the case. It could have been something else of course and this lip reader could be a hundred percent wrong. But lets assume he's not. What an amazingly insensitive and rude comment to make about the First Lady. I used to smoke and I can tell you that it is massively important to have someone to keep you responsible when you are trying to quit that ridiculous habit! The fact that she was successful shows how dedicated she was to helping, and continuing helping her husband to quit. That's just what any good partner would and should do.
The problem I have with the GOP, among the many other problems I have with the GOP, Is that they just don't seem to have a brain to mouth filter. They don't seem to understand that some things shouldn't be said or even thought of. This is a prime example. In this case the President himself seemed to take it in stride, and the First lady rolled her eyes and I would assume that she simply brushed it off later on. But the GOP pulls these kinds of things all the time. Usually we hear about it later on when someone leaks the contents of a private meeting, as was the case where Romney had discounted a larger number of the people in the United States as being something he wasn't concerned about. and its not just the politicians that do this. Its also non office holding people of the GOP that are the most quotable in this. Throw a dart into the Fox News studio and you're probably going to hit someone that has been guilty of this...sometimes purposely.
I personally give the first lady a pass on this one. If that's indeed what transpired, and Representative Boehner did indeed made such a snide comment, then she had every right in the world to be irritated. I think that Michelle Obama was very reserved in her reaction. Personally I would have probably cupped the back of his head with my hand. But then that's why I don't hold office, because I'm pretty sure that I would get fired for that.
Wednesday, January 23, 2013
Big Brother Is Watching...Not really
I was watching CBS In The Morning to my morning tea, and there was this really interesting story about public bus systems around the country that are now installing cameras in thier buses to moniter whats going on. This is being met with some resistance of course, not just because they are being video taped...but also because they also record sound.
The argument from skeptics is that its Big Brother listening in on thier conversations and ivading their privacy. Of course, the conspiracy theroy freaks had to publically chime in. Do we really expect anything less?
I've always had a real problem with the Big Brother conspiracy theory. It just doesn't make logistical sense. Just to maintain such a program it would take an enormous workforce that would likely drop the unemployment rate significantly. As that rate is taking its time to drop...I'm thinking not so much.
Beyond the conspiracy theory nonsense, people are generally complaining about this move to better monitor mass transit rides, are complaining because they in general don't want their nonsense being recorded. The story cited a woman who had dropped her cell phone for instance, and fell over trying to pick it up. She then tried to sue the bus company for the resulting injury. She was recorded by a camera that had been installed on the bus, and of course she lost. How surprising.
School buses are also starting to follow the lead, many districts beginning to install these cameras to help monitor what the student riders are doing. Very good idea! Lets face it, drivers are under a lot of pressure to bring these children safely from home to school and back again. The cameras are just another tool to help them make sure that the riders are riding safely. I wish that cameras on the bus were the norm back when I went to school. I think that many of the bullying issues that I had to deal with would have been resolved more satisfactory than it turned out.
People need to remember that when they are in a public setting they have no reasonable assurance of privacy or that they wont be recorded by something, be it a photographer, surveillance camera or whatever. Its a public place. If they really want to avoid being recorded like that...perhaps becoming a hermit and holding themselves up in a remote area of the world might be more desirable to them. Oh wait...Satellites.
The argument from skeptics is that its Big Brother listening in on thier conversations and ivading their privacy. Of course, the conspiracy theroy freaks had to publically chime in. Do we really expect anything less?
I've always had a real problem with the Big Brother conspiracy theory. It just doesn't make logistical sense. Just to maintain such a program it would take an enormous workforce that would likely drop the unemployment rate significantly. As that rate is taking its time to drop...I'm thinking not so much.
Beyond the conspiracy theory nonsense, people are generally complaining about this move to better monitor mass transit rides, are complaining because they in general don't want their nonsense being recorded. The story cited a woman who had dropped her cell phone for instance, and fell over trying to pick it up. She then tried to sue the bus company for the resulting injury. She was recorded by a camera that had been installed on the bus, and of course she lost. How surprising.
School buses are also starting to follow the lead, many districts beginning to install these cameras to help monitor what the student riders are doing. Very good idea! Lets face it, drivers are under a lot of pressure to bring these children safely from home to school and back again. The cameras are just another tool to help them make sure that the riders are riding safely. I wish that cameras on the bus were the norm back when I went to school. I think that many of the bullying issues that I had to deal with would have been resolved more satisfactory than it turned out.
People need to remember that when they are in a public setting they have no reasonable assurance of privacy or that they wont be recorded by something, be it a photographer, surveillance camera or whatever. Its a public place. If they really want to avoid being recorded like that...perhaps becoming a hermit and holding themselves up in a remote area of the world might be more desirable to them. Oh wait...Satellites.
Tuesday, January 22, 2013
Sometimes its The Best Help You Can Get
There are times that we need help on top of what we are able to do on our own. Now this is really why public assistance programs are so important. But thats not really the purpose of this topic and is for another post all together.
This subject is more about the pains of growing up, and increasingly taking over your own responsibillities as an adult. There is really no getting around it, its something we all have to face eventually. I would even put it at almost a rite of passage level event in our lives. The problem Im seeing among many of the younger generation (my God I just made myself feel old) is that many want to push back the timing of when that happens, often relying on thier parents for support well after its reasonable, or even rational to do so.
I often wondered what motivated people in that stage of live to avoid it, in some cases like the plauge. Now I ended up living with my parents until just before I turned 28. But that wasnt by choice and it was by no means fun for me. I needed to have a job. I needed to have a place of my own. I needed to have my own space. I also realized to accomplish those three goals I had in life that I needed to take responsibillity in my life and just do it and not rely on others. The only reason I ended up living with my parents for so long is because I ran into economic hard times because of the job poor area I was in...and that was before the economic down turn in 2008. But that was by no means comfortable or acceptable to me.
But sometimes such an issue is self inflicted. Thats when this mentallity becomes an issue. I have noticed that many of the young ones are intentionally putting this off. But I think its appropriate to remind those ones that life eventually will catch up with them one way or another and they will end up with a potentially cataclismac event in their lives. Living vicariously can be fun but responsibillity has to take precidance in your adult life. Remember this: You may want to have fun all the time, but you have to fund that fun somehow and you can not rely on your parents to do it. Sometimes the best help you can get is no help at all. Sink or swim life these days largly puts you on your own. Its up to you to make or break yourself. What direction are you going to choose?
This subject is more about the pains of growing up, and increasingly taking over your own responsibillities as an adult. There is really no getting around it, its something we all have to face eventually. I would even put it at almost a rite of passage level event in our lives. The problem Im seeing among many of the younger generation (my God I just made myself feel old) is that many want to push back the timing of when that happens, often relying on thier parents for support well after its reasonable, or even rational to do so.
I often wondered what motivated people in that stage of live to avoid it, in some cases like the plauge. Now I ended up living with my parents until just before I turned 28. But that wasnt by choice and it was by no means fun for me. I needed to have a job. I needed to have a place of my own. I needed to have my own space. I also realized to accomplish those three goals I had in life that I needed to take responsibillity in my life and just do it and not rely on others. The only reason I ended up living with my parents for so long is because I ran into economic hard times because of the job poor area I was in...and that was before the economic down turn in 2008. But that was by no means comfortable or acceptable to me.
But sometimes such an issue is self inflicted. Thats when this mentallity becomes an issue. I have noticed that many of the young ones are intentionally putting this off. But I think its appropriate to remind those ones that life eventually will catch up with them one way or another and they will end up with a potentially cataclismac event in their lives. Living vicariously can be fun but responsibillity has to take precidance in your adult life. Remember this: You may want to have fun all the time, but you have to fund that fun somehow and you can not rely on your parents to do it. Sometimes the best help you can get is no help at all. Sink or swim life these days largly puts you on your own. Its up to you to make or break yourself. What direction are you going to choose?
Monday, January 21, 2013
The Human Element And Trickle Down Economics
Trickle down Economics. The idea is to stack the cards in favor of businesses so they can improve their services, hire more employees and so on. Basically give big business more money and they will fairly trickle it down to the people in the middle and lower classes. And on paper it seems like a great idea...on paper.
There was something else in recent history that looked great on paper but ultimately failed. Most historians admit to that much. What is it? Its called Communism. On paper Communism should have worked magically! But it ultimately Russia's Communist government faded in 1991 when its population voted it out, and many of the other countries that followed Communist based governments started to disappear and are now all but a memory. So What happened?
The human element ended up screwing it up for the rest of the eastern society.
Humans are fundamentally greedy beings. They want to take and take and take, but when it comes to giving back most are fundamentally greedy about doing so and will only do so when put under pressure. Thankfully that's not a issue with every single person in existence, but in my experience over the years, it is an uncomfortable greater majority that is like this.
So in Communism the government had all the control and was supposed to dole out everything to its citizens equally so that no one went without. Now on paper, and I know some would disagree, or agree to disagree, that looks like a winning idea. I agree with it too because the idea it conveys to me is that everyone has a higher sense of vitality because they are getting the food, clothing and housing they need. But it ultimately failed because of the human element. The ones that were to do the dolling out became greedy and of course we know what happened. Its a matter of historical fact.
The same is now happening with the so called "trickle down economics". On paper it also work winningly. Its also not being actively applied on paper. Its when the human element becomes involved that causes the problem. Again, trickle down economics intentionally stacks the cards toward rich business owners in hopes that in turn, they will trickle it down two the people beneath them to improve their standard of living so they, who make up the greater majority, can afford to live firstly, and secondly afford to move money around a little bit keeping the economy liquid. I love that idea...it unfortunately almost never happens.
The Rich Get Richer and the Poor Get Poorer, as the phrase goes, and unfortunately that is exactly what's happened here. And sadly the rich and the people in politics that represent them are the ones that are the problem. They obtain success in their business dealings and suddenly they don't want to let the profits of that go for any reason. So they fight. And where you would think giving them tax breaks and kickbacks in the form of subsidies and bailouts as well, would help them unlock more funds for them to work with to create new jobs, perhaps offer a better pay to the workers that are bringing in the money for them, or even a stronger more affordable health care package so they are sufficiently medically covered. But that doesn't happen and when it does, they either give them the most garbage possible coverage OR they offer it but only to full time employee's but find ways to keep the majority of their staff registered as part time so they don't get benefits. Sometimes in the worst cases, both.
It boggles my mind how people think that this is even remotely fair. Coming from a person that is at the rock bottom of my financial life, its not fair and it needs to change. I think that the majority of Americans feel the same way, and some of those either don't want to admit it or they don't want to be vocal about it.
Stand up America. Time to be vocal. There's nothing wrong with being rich if you developed a business or product that got you there...but its not OK to do it at the expense of everyone around you.
There was something else in recent history that looked great on paper but ultimately failed. Most historians admit to that much. What is it? Its called Communism. On paper Communism should have worked magically! But it ultimately Russia's Communist government faded in 1991 when its population voted it out, and many of the other countries that followed Communist based governments started to disappear and are now all but a memory. So What happened?
The human element ended up screwing it up for the rest of the eastern society.
Humans are fundamentally greedy beings. They want to take and take and take, but when it comes to giving back most are fundamentally greedy about doing so and will only do so when put under pressure. Thankfully that's not a issue with every single person in existence, but in my experience over the years, it is an uncomfortable greater majority that is like this.
So in Communism the government had all the control and was supposed to dole out everything to its citizens equally so that no one went without. Now on paper, and I know some would disagree, or agree to disagree, that looks like a winning idea. I agree with it too because the idea it conveys to me is that everyone has a higher sense of vitality because they are getting the food, clothing and housing they need. But it ultimately failed because of the human element. The ones that were to do the dolling out became greedy and of course we know what happened. Its a matter of historical fact.
The same is now happening with the so called "trickle down economics". On paper it also work winningly. Its also not being actively applied on paper. Its when the human element becomes involved that causes the problem. Again, trickle down economics intentionally stacks the cards toward rich business owners in hopes that in turn, they will trickle it down two the people beneath them to improve their standard of living so they, who make up the greater majority, can afford to live firstly, and secondly afford to move money around a little bit keeping the economy liquid. I love that idea...it unfortunately almost never happens.
The Rich Get Richer and the Poor Get Poorer, as the phrase goes, and unfortunately that is exactly what's happened here. And sadly the rich and the people in politics that represent them are the ones that are the problem. They obtain success in their business dealings and suddenly they don't want to let the profits of that go for any reason. So they fight. And where you would think giving them tax breaks and kickbacks in the form of subsidies and bailouts as well, would help them unlock more funds for them to work with to create new jobs, perhaps offer a better pay to the workers that are bringing in the money for them, or even a stronger more affordable health care package so they are sufficiently medically covered. But that doesn't happen and when it does, they either give them the most garbage possible coverage OR they offer it but only to full time employee's but find ways to keep the majority of their staff registered as part time so they don't get benefits. Sometimes in the worst cases, both.
It boggles my mind how people think that this is even remotely fair. Coming from a person that is at the rock bottom of my financial life, its not fair and it needs to change. I think that the majority of Americans feel the same way, and some of those either don't want to admit it or they don't want to be vocal about it.
Stand up America. Time to be vocal. There's nothing wrong with being rich if you developed a business or product that got you there...but its not OK to do it at the expense of everyone around you.
Fear Of Change (fun with science)
Its funny to me how people will leave something that comes out of the science community relatively alone, such as finding a new species for instance, because it doesn't affect them. New species? that's cool...move on with my life, right? But in that last sentence lays the key to the problem:
CHANGE
People, humans...ALL OF US...fundamentally hate and fear change. Especially the kind of change that requires us to change our habits or makes us responsible for our actions. We get in to this rhythm that's comfortable for us individually, and we don't want to change that because it disrupts what we are used to, and causing our set flow to become chaotic in our minds. In reality it's really not, but
now where changing out habits are concerned, people are so super glued to their habits that they will fight tooth and nail. Something as simple as people getting a club card at a grocery store that will help them to save a little money on their grocery bill, they wont because "its an extra card I have to worry about" and its such a "burden" to take the 5 seconds to pull the card out at the register so they don't have to pay as much as they would have. Ive seen people out there that have literally halved or more their grocery bill because they had the card...but no people don't want it because it changes their shopping habits. Ive seen people give these glares to cashiers at grocery stores as if the cashier who just told them they can save 10 dollars on their grocery bill as if they just called them a cunt! Its really that bad!
Responsibility! Often fear of change is spawned from another fundamental human problem...We as a race don't want to be held accountable for our actions. We feel like because we breath air and walk the earth we are entitled to do as we please without any kind of recourse whatsoever. Such is really not the case of course, as we do have a criminal justice system...of obviously we hold each other accountable for things.
This is why things like the manufacturing, selling and use of cigarettes, for instance, has become such a hot bed issue over the last, oh Id says, 75 years or so. Little by little we are discovering more information that damns smoking cigarettes because of their cancer causing properties. We have strong, well researched medical evidence its true. Oh but lone behold the tobacco companies have to fight that with their own funded "research" to disprove what the surgeon general, and many other medical research facilities around the world have found. Why? Not because they want to verify the findings and change if its true! No! They are doing it for one reason and one reason only! They don't want to stop producing a hot seller, even if it kills. It also makes them accountable for their actions, and they don't want that either
How about the bible believers? Now I'm not saying I follow the bible, there are certain principles that i walked away with that I found that were applicable to a life that doesn't include biblical religion, but I did study it for many many years before I walked away from it. Let's face it...biblical religion followed the way the bible teaches it requires people to change, and holds them responsible for their actions and people will fight tooth and nail to avoid it. This is why you see so many people, whether atheist or not, who will in some cases violently resist people who come to their doors, not necessarily because they don't believe what these people are preaching is true or no, it very well may be, what I am saying is these different belief systems they are preaching about require change, and they don't want make that kind of change, because making that change makes them more responsible for their actions. and that in many peoples mind is a grievous thing.
How about the theory of global warming/climate change? People fight tooth and nail against this as well. They will even try to skew the definitions of "hypothesis" (which is the educated guess that people try to say the theory is, because a hypothesis is formed out of observations that a scientist makes based on the knowledge of the working world they already have) and "theory" which is what a hypothesis turns into after being extensively tested by people. Its not that is untrue. there is a HUGE amount of evidence that modern Global Warming/Climate change problem is caused by us, enough where climatologists are saying we should be doing something...oh but wait...that makes us have to change the way we do things...there's that change again. Being that change is massive...oh we have to fight that with vigor, cause we should never have to change. EVER! and so, the argument is not really a result over questioning the validity of the science, but over the fact that such a thing being true requires us to make huge changes, and since we fear that change, many people are going to fight it, even get down and dirty to fight it.
Change shouldn't be something to fight if its clearly for the better. swapping meanings for words to downplay the seriousness of something, to trying to come up with evidence against it just so you don't have to make that change...doesn't mean that the change shouldn't be made.
CHANGE
People, humans...ALL OF US...fundamentally hate and fear change. Especially the kind of change that requires us to change our habits or makes us responsible for our actions. We get in to this rhythm that's comfortable for us individually, and we don't want to change that because it disrupts what we are used to, and causing our set flow to become chaotic in our minds. In reality it's really not, but
now where changing out habits are concerned, people are so super glued to their habits that they will fight tooth and nail. Something as simple as people getting a club card at a grocery store that will help them to save a little money on their grocery bill, they wont because "its an extra card I have to worry about" and its such a "burden" to take the 5 seconds to pull the card out at the register so they don't have to pay as much as they would have. Ive seen people out there that have literally halved or more their grocery bill because they had the card...but no people don't want it because it changes their shopping habits. Ive seen people give these glares to cashiers at grocery stores as if the cashier who just told them they can save 10 dollars on their grocery bill as if they just called them a cunt! Its really that bad!
Responsibility! Often fear of change is spawned from another fundamental human problem...We as a race don't want to be held accountable for our actions. We feel like because we breath air and walk the earth we are entitled to do as we please without any kind of recourse whatsoever. Such is really not the case of course, as we do have a criminal justice system...of obviously we hold each other accountable for things.
This is why things like the manufacturing, selling and use of cigarettes, for instance, has become such a hot bed issue over the last, oh Id says, 75 years or so. Little by little we are discovering more information that damns smoking cigarettes because of their cancer causing properties. We have strong, well researched medical evidence its true. Oh but lone behold the tobacco companies have to fight that with their own funded "research" to disprove what the surgeon general, and many other medical research facilities around the world have found. Why? Not because they want to verify the findings and change if its true! No! They are doing it for one reason and one reason only! They don't want to stop producing a hot seller, even if it kills. It also makes them accountable for their actions, and they don't want that either
How about the bible believers? Now I'm not saying I follow the bible, there are certain principles that i walked away with that I found that were applicable to a life that doesn't include biblical religion, but I did study it for many many years before I walked away from it. Let's face it...biblical religion followed the way the bible teaches it requires people to change, and holds them responsible for their actions and people will fight tooth and nail to avoid it. This is why you see so many people, whether atheist or not, who will in some cases violently resist people who come to their doors, not necessarily because they don't believe what these people are preaching is true or no, it very well may be, what I am saying is these different belief systems they are preaching about require change, and they don't want make that kind of change, because making that change makes them more responsible for their actions. and that in many peoples mind is a grievous thing.
How about the theory of global warming/climate change? People fight tooth and nail against this as well. They will even try to skew the definitions of "hypothesis" (which is the educated guess that people try to say the theory is, because a hypothesis is formed out of observations that a scientist makes based on the knowledge of the working world they already have) and "theory" which is what a hypothesis turns into after being extensively tested by people. Its not that is untrue. there is a HUGE amount of evidence that modern Global Warming/Climate change problem is caused by us, enough where climatologists are saying we should be doing something...oh but wait...that makes us have to change the way we do things...there's that change again. Being that change is massive...oh we have to fight that with vigor, cause we should never have to change. EVER! and so, the argument is not really a result over questioning the validity of the science, but over the fact that such a thing being true requires us to make huge changes, and since we fear that change, many people are going to fight it, even get down and dirty to fight it.
Change shouldn't be something to fight if its clearly for the better. swapping meanings for words to downplay the seriousness of something, to trying to come up with evidence against it just so you don't have to make that change...doesn't mean that the change shouldn't be made.
Sunday, January 20, 2013
Metabolic Syndrome...Are YOU at risk?
Every year The Centers for Disease Control comes out with a list. This list contains the top 15 causes of death among Americans. Number 7 two years running was Diabetes. Now this journal is not about people who CURRENTLY have diabetes, its to educate on the risk factors that can lead to developing diabetes.
The risk factors that we're talking about are called "Metabolic Syndrom" and you probably are one of the 90 million Americans that don't even realize they have it! Metabolic Syndrome is not a disease, but rather a condition made of of several different health issues that are the collective spawn that is Metabolic Syndrome.
Now what are the risk factors that can lead to Metabolic syndrome?
RISK FACTORS:
1: If your BMI is more than 30, if its easier to measure, if you have a waistline of 35 inches or more for a female, 40+ in a male
now just because you dont have the first risk factor
2: Triglyceride level of 150 + MG/DL
3: Blood Pressure of 130/85 or more.
4: HDL Cholestorol of las than 50 for a female or 40 for a male
5: Blood Sugar level ov 100+ Mg/DL (thats after fasting)
now having any one of these factors is a problem. Having two of them is worse...but If you have three of them you have officially have Metabolic Syndrome and your chances of developing diabetes just increased by 5x. Obviously the first factor you can check yourself. the remaining 4 have to be checked by a doctor.
Your body is an amazing clue giver, and just like anything else it will give you clues as to whether you have Metabolic Syndrome or not. Here are a few questions to ask yourself if you think you might have Metabolic Syndrome:
Do I experience the following, especially after meals?
Fatigue or sleepiness
Cravings for sweets
Difficulty focusing
If you do DON'T ignore it. You likely have developed Metabolic Syndrome and have gotten on the path toward developing Diabetes. And as a number of my friends will tell you...that path is a disastrous path to be on.
What causes this? When you eat, the foods you take in are changed into glucose by your body. Glucose is the fuel your body runs on. Pretty basic there. Now when glucose enters your blood, your body releases insulin (now there's a word i KNOW everyone is familiar with) which ushers the glucose out of your blood and into your cells where its actually used for energy. well many of us eat too much for out body to burn off. In high levels, glucose in the bloodstream is toxic.
the glucose you might better recognize as carbohydrates. These are your potatoes, pastas, grains breads cereals, sweets sugars and high fructose syrups. Once in your digestive system, your body changes carbs into glucose, but again in excess it pollutes the blood stream. That's where the a fore mentioned insulin comes into play. But insulin only works when cells have room for glucose to go. When glucose cant be burned off as energy because the cells that would normally take it in are already full, it gets stored as fat. once enough fat has been accumulated it may stop accepting glucose. Then the glucose hangs out in your blood stream overworking your pancreas. eventually the pancreas can wear out and lose its ability to produce sufficient natural insulin...this is when drastic measures have to be taken and synthetic insulin shots become part of day to day life, just to stay alive!
The risk factors that we're talking about are called "Metabolic Syndrom" and you probably are one of the 90 million Americans that don't even realize they have it! Metabolic Syndrome is not a disease, but rather a condition made of of several different health issues that are the collective spawn that is Metabolic Syndrome.
Now what are the risk factors that can lead to Metabolic syndrome?
RISK FACTORS:
1: If your BMI is more than 30, if its easier to measure, if you have a waistline of 35 inches or more for a female, 40+ in a male
now just because you dont have the first risk factor
2: Triglyceride level of 150 + MG/DL
3: Blood Pressure of 130/85 or more.
4: HDL Cholestorol of las than 50 for a female or 40 for a male
5: Blood Sugar level ov 100+ Mg/DL (thats after fasting)
now having any one of these factors is a problem. Having two of them is worse...but If you have three of them you have officially have Metabolic Syndrome and your chances of developing diabetes just increased by 5x. Obviously the first factor you can check yourself. the remaining 4 have to be checked by a doctor.
Your body is an amazing clue giver, and just like anything else it will give you clues as to whether you have Metabolic Syndrome or not. Here are a few questions to ask yourself if you think you might have Metabolic Syndrome:
Do I experience the following, especially after meals?
Fatigue or sleepiness
Cravings for sweets
Difficulty focusing
If you do DON'T ignore it. You likely have developed Metabolic Syndrome and have gotten on the path toward developing Diabetes. And as a number of my friends will tell you...that path is a disastrous path to be on.
What causes this? When you eat, the foods you take in are changed into glucose by your body. Glucose is the fuel your body runs on. Pretty basic there. Now when glucose enters your blood, your body releases insulin (now there's a word i KNOW everyone is familiar with) which ushers the glucose out of your blood and into your cells where its actually used for energy. well many of us eat too much for out body to burn off. In high levels, glucose in the bloodstream is toxic.
the glucose you might better recognize as carbohydrates. These are your potatoes, pastas, grains breads cereals, sweets sugars and high fructose syrups. Once in your digestive system, your body changes carbs into glucose, but again in excess it pollutes the blood stream. That's where the a fore mentioned insulin comes into play. But insulin only works when cells have room for glucose to go. When glucose cant be burned off as energy because the cells that would normally take it in are already full, it gets stored as fat. once enough fat has been accumulated it may stop accepting glucose. Then the glucose hangs out in your blood stream overworking your pancreas. eventually the pancreas can wear out and lose its ability to produce sufficient natural insulin...this is when drastic measures have to be taken and synthetic insulin shots become part of day to day life, just to stay alive!
Red Bull Gives You Wings...Sort Of...not really?
So in New York, a lawsuit was filed in the U.S District Court for the Southern District of New York, Claiming that Redbull, everyones' favorite energy drink that "gives you wings" doesn't exactly give you wings. Now this might be a little old news but I found this extremely fascinating, because Ive never thought that energy drinks did any real good, at least not to the extent that they claim too and Ive always thought that they were kind of a health problem, despite any claims they may make.
The lawsuit casts echoing doubt that the energy drink has as much caffeine in it as it once claimed. It sites recent reports seen in the scientific journal Nutrition Reviews and The New York Times. Whats interesting about the lawsuit is that they listed the milligrams of caffeine that are found in several different products, such as No Doz, for instance that has 100 milligrams of caffeine for about 50 cents, and yet Red Bull's 8.4 oz energy drink contains about 80 milligrams at $2.19 a can...which i can verify that type of pricing giving I used to work at a gas station and sold the stuff all the time. According to the lawsuit their findings found that a 12 oz cup of coffee would contain significantly more caffeine than than the same size can of Red Bull...at about $1.85, cheaper than the energy drink.
My thoughts? I'm really not surprised. Ive always been concerned about the validity and usability of energy drinks which have a consumption limit warning on them. I think Red Bull for instance has a limit of 2 or three a day depending on the size, same with Monster drinks. 5 hour energy is something like two servings a day and believe it or not, those little bottles of 5 hour energy are 2 servings a piece!
Whats really funny is this fact had been largely unknown until these studies came out and a man by the name of Benjamin Careathers of the Bronx NY, who is the lead plaintiff of this lawsuit, by the way, had been drinking Red Bull since 2002. that's around eleven years now! And Red Bull has been around a lot longer than that! Can you imagine not being aware of what you were actually putting in your body all that time? Or in this case, what you weren't putting in your body? That's kind of scary actually. It makes me wonder what else other these companies are hiding from the public!
The reason I have such animosity towards these energy drinks is because, frankly it seems like they are being marketed to people that are not really all that healthy. Think about it! If you were healthy, eating right, keeping your exercise up and generally taking care of your body properly, no one should need to have things like Red Bull, or Monster or whatever energy you throw a dart at and hit. I think that we are basically using these things as a replacement to good healthy habits that we should be developing.
And you parents, watch what your kids are drinking. There is absolutely no excuse for letting your 10 year old kid drink cans of Monster and Red Bull. How irresponsible and incompetent are you? You are going to end up screwing up your kids metabolism and sleeping rhythm doing that. That's going to have far reaching negative effects on those kids bodies. Not really giving them the great start in life they deserve are you?
How about this? Instead of using an energy drink to keep yourself awake because of your bad eating and sleeping habits, how about just change your diet and develop a good sleeping pattern? That would go a long way towards a healthier lifestyle, and hey! You may not even have to drag through work!
The lawsuit casts echoing doubt that the energy drink has as much caffeine in it as it once claimed. It sites recent reports seen in the scientific journal Nutrition Reviews and The New York Times. Whats interesting about the lawsuit is that they listed the milligrams of caffeine that are found in several different products, such as No Doz, for instance that has 100 milligrams of caffeine for about 50 cents, and yet Red Bull's 8.4 oz energy drink contains about 80 milligrams at $2.19 a can...which i can verify that type of pricing giving I used to work at a gas station and sold the stuff all the time. According to the lawsuit their findings found that a 12 oz cup of coffee would contain significantly more caffeine than than the same size can of Red Bull...at about $1.85, cheaper than the energy drink.
My thoughts? I'm really not surprised. Ive always been concerned about the validity and usability of energy drinks which have a consumption limit warning on them. I think Red Bull for instance has a limit of 2 or three a day depending on the size, same with Monster drinks. 5 hour energy is something like two servings a day and believe it or not, those little bottles of 5 hour energy are 2 servings a piece!
Whats really funny is this fact had been largely unknown until these studies came out and a man by the name of Benjamin Careathers of the Bronx NY, who is the lead plaintiff of this lawsuit, by the way, had been drinking Red Bull since 2002. that's around eleven years now! And Red Bull has been around a lot longer than that! Can you imagine not being aware of what you were actually putting in your body all that time? Or in this case, what you weren't putting in your body? That's kind of scary actually. It makes me wonder what else other these companies are hiding from the public!
The reason I have such animosity towards these energy drinks is because, frankly it seems like they are being marketed to people that are not really all that healthy. Think about it! If you were healthy, eating right, keeping your exercise up and generally taking care of your body properly, no one should need to have things like Red Bull, or Monster or whatever energy you throw a dart at and hit. I think that we are basically using these things as a replacement to good healthy habits that we should be developing.
And you parents, watch what your kids are drinking. There is absolutely no excuse for letting your 10 year old kid drink cans of Monster and Red Bull. How irresponsible and incompetent are you? You are going to end up screwing up your kids metabolism and sleeping rhythm doing that. That's going to have far reaching negative effects on those kids bodies. Not really giving them the great start in life they deserve are you?
How about this? Instead of using an energy drink to keep yourself awake because of your bad eating and sleeping habits, how about just change your diet and develop a good sleeping pattern? That would go a long way towards a healthier lifestyle, and hey! You may not even have to drag through work!
New Years And The Importance Of Setting Commitments
Well its pretty deep into the new year now. It would still be silly to ask how everyone is doing on their new year's goals because after 20 days, not enough time has passed to see how our "resolutions" are going to pan out.
I want focus on the term "resolution". I really hate that term. At one time the word "resolute" carried more weight, it meant something. It meant that the person that was making the resolution was going to do something to follow through with that resolution, and that they would not stop until they accomplished what they set out to do. These days...not so much. These days, the term "resolution" carries a negative stigma that has become the butt end of countless jokes. That's because a resolution is made without the actual thought that they may be achieved, in fact they are almost expected to fail. With that concept in mind, there is no longer any weight, or even point for that matter, in making a resolution.
Instead of making a new years resolution, I like to make New Years "commitments". I feel that making a commitment these days carry more force, more weight, than making the traditional resolution. That might seem like a funny statement, mainly because even though in definition they are really not terms related to each other at all.
So making a New Year's commitment sends a different signal to the brain and affects us differently than making a new years "resolution" because it has a different meaning.
So my "commitments" for the year, if you're wondering is the following:
Untill then, Happy New Year and may 2013 be 100x's better than 2012
I want focus on the term "resolution". I really hate that term. At one time the word "resolute" carried more weight, it meant something. It meant that the person that was making the resolution was going to do something to follow through with that resolution, and that they would not stop until they accomplished what they set out to do. These days...not so much. These days, the term "resolution" carries a negative stigma that has become the butt end of countless jokes. That's because a resolution is made without the actual thought that they may be achieved, in fact they are almost expected to fail. With that concept in mind, there is no longer any weight, or even point for that matter, in making a resolution.
Instead of making a new years resolution, I like to make New Years "commitments". I feel that making a commitment these days carry more force, more weight, than making the traditional resolution. That might seem like a funny statement, mainly because even though in definition they are really not terms related to each other at all.
So making a New Year's commitment sends a different signal to the brain and affects us differently than making a new years "resolution" because it has a different meaning.
So my "commitments" for the year, if you're wondering is the following:
- write in this blog at least three times a week to start off and then try and up it to 5
- Ive had a small business in the background for sometime now. I want to build it up so that its livable and I can take the extra time I have and start volunteering for different causes around the area.
- be more locally sociable, and not necessarily just within the same old same old group Ive been in. I will always be fully involved in the social circle I currently am in...but I need to expand too.
Untill then, Happy New Year and may 2013 be 100x's better than 2012
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)