Trans Fats Banned

In this article from msnbc, the new trans fat banned in New York City is discussed and how the public is reacting. Trans fats are believed to be harmful because they contribute to heart disease by raising bad cholesterol and lowering good cholesterol at the same time. Some experts say that makes trans fats worse than saturated fat. The FDA estimates the average American eats 4.7 pounds of trans fats each year. Mayor Michael Bloomberg, who banned smoking in bars and restaurants during his first term, seems somewhat health-obsessed, and even maintains a monthly weight-loss competition with one of his friends in order to stay slim. The mayor has contributed in great ways to NYC, but maybe he should stop living his life through his city.

I believe in making our country, even our world a healthier, cleaner, and better place. However, when it comes to certain ingredients in foods I think we're pushing it a bit far. People will find their fatty foods whether we like it or not. It is their choice what they put in their bodies, not the government's. And that's disregarding our economy...you know...this little recession we are in. Bakeries and restaurants are frustrated with the Mayor because it hurts their businesses greatly.

New York’s decision to ban trans fats has mostly been greatly supported by health and medical groups, although the American Heart Association warns that if restaurants aren’t given ample time to make the switch, they could end up reverting to ingredients high in saturated fat, which is just as bad.

Guantanamo

David M. Herszenhorn writes an article in the Times about Guantanamo Bay and Obama's new plan. On Wednesday, the Senate voted overwhelmingly to cut from a war spending bill $80 million that was requested by Obama to close the detention center at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba. However, now they plan to transfew the detainess to the United States and its territories. The problem is that we don't want to be responsible for these potential criminals, yet we don't want them running around our neighborhoods either. Obama is also trying to rid the dentainees to other countries, basically so they wont be our problem.

Selling our fugitives to other countries, I think, is the only solution, and there for a good idea. Realistically they will be fine if kept in the U.S. but the citizens probably wouldn't be too cool with that. We have enough problems as it is so I think other countries would be willing to hold these criminals for us. Besides, I'm sure they want them to be kept safe and know where they are.

Cloning

In John Terry's article, a strange foreseeing of what to come of cloning is examined. Basically, humans are soon to be cloned, but probably not in the United States. Asia offers researchers new labs, fewer restrictions and a different view of divinity and the afterlife.In South Korea, when Hwang Woo Suk reported creating human embryonic stem cells through cloning, he did not apologize for offending religious taboos. He justified cloning by citing his Buddhist belief in recycling life through reincarnation.Most of southern and eastern Asia displays relatively little opposition to either cloned embryonic stem-cell research or genetically modified crops.

I'm not too interested in this whole cloning ordeal but I'm running out of topics, so this was one of the few controversies left. It just seems strange...are the clones going to be complete human beings with emotions and intellect or are they solely going to be cloning organs in need? I don't want to be living "The Island" if you know what I'm saying. We can't just create human beings and kill them for their livers so that alcoholics can live. Population control people. We can't afford the people we have living on this world today...we don't need twice as many. Mo people, mo problems.

Social Security

Robert Pear's article addresses the declining benefits to our elderly. He notes that this will be the first year, in three decades, that Social Security recipients will not get any increase on their benefits. Even Medicare trust funds are deteriorating. Last year, Social Security and Medicare totaled to one third of the federal budget, $1 trillion. We obviously don't have that money anymore, so our elderly is going to be severely impacted. President Obama's budget for the future also assumes no increase of pay toward Social Security and Medicare in the next few years.

I don't really know where to stand on this. I don't like the money that comes out of my paycheck to go to 70 year old women to play tennis in Florida but I just don't know what they expect to do with all the old people that are going to loose there homes, insurance, and necessities. Many senior citizens are already barely living on the money they make, so now with the decrease coming from government they will definitely be short. I just don't think the outcome will be helpful to our countries recession. I mean, what could be more important than keeping people alive; infrastructure....military?

I'm obviously far from comprehending our federal budget as a whole, but it doesn't seem right that seniors are suffering when they can't really do much about it.