News

New study finds that regular intoxication makes teens more sexually active

3 Comments

Story from the Toronto Sun. (H/T Lex Communis)

Excerpt:

Pot-smoking teenaged girls are more likely to have sex than those who don’t, a new study suggests.

Drunkenness also increases sexual activity in teens, especially when boys and girls are allowed to spend too much time together, according to a report by the Institute of Marriage and Family Canada released yesterday.

“Adolescent sexual behaviour places teens at risk of ill health, unintended pregnancy and emotional concerns. The earlier teens initiate sex the greater the risk,” said Peter Jon Mitchell, an analyst for the institute.

[…]The study found 39% of teens aged 14 to 19 have had sexual intercourse, which is 41% of girls and 38% of boys.

Teen smoking also increased the likelihood of promiscuity. Girl smokers were 78% more likely to have sex while boys were 98% more likely to engage in sexual activity, the report says.

“Analysis also revealed that teen girls who reported they had never smoked were 58% less likely than the national average to have had sexual intercourse while boys who reported they never smoked were 56% less likely,” Mitchell said.

Life Site News adds:

Study researcher, Peter Jon Mitchell, said that the findings underscore what parents may know intuitively to be true. “Teens who are under the influence of drugs or alcohol are more likely to engage in risky sexual behavior,” said Mitchell. “This study reveals a ‘risk profile’ that may help parents as they nurture their teens through to adulthood. And it becomes all the more critical when we consider the correlation between attempting suicide and sexual activity, particularly among girls.”

The study “Rated PG, Part II: How drugs, alcohol and other factors influence teen sexual activity,” can be read in full in English, here. “Part I: Rated PG: How parental influence impacts teen sexual activity” is available here.

Something for parents to think about. And talk about.

News

Obama to nationalize student loans, how does that work in New Zealand?

3 Comments

Story from CNS News. (H/T Gateway Pundit)

Excerpt:

A bill currently before the Senate would empower the Obama administration to nationalize the student lending industry, eliminating the federally subsidized private loans millions of university students rely on to finance their educations

The Student Aid and Fiscal Responsibility Act – currently being considered by the Senate Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions (HELP) Committee – would eliminate the Federal Family Education Loan (FFEL) program. FFEL loans are federally subsidized and make up approximately 80 percent of the student lending industry.

According to the Department of Education, 14.3 million of the 17.5 million student loans were federally subsidized for the 2009-2010 fiscal year. Under Obama’s plan, the government would consume the entirety of this industry – a total of $103 billion in 2009-2010.

I wrote about the situation in New Zealand before. In New Zealand, they have a government-run system.

Excerpt:

Thousands of people with student loans are defaulting on payments, leaving the Government to chase hundreds of millions of dollars.

More than one in five borrowers – or 114,000 people – have overdue payments and thousands of students are leaving tertiary education with no qualification and big bills.

The Education Ministry’s student loan scheme annual report shows that $306 million in payments is overdue, a $100m increase from a year ago.

The substantial growth includes a big rise in the level of payments owed by people now living overseas, more than doubling to $114m.

New Zealand University Students Association co-president Sophia Blair said it was not surprising that students with loans were heading overseas and letting the bills mount. “You can earn higher wages [overseas].”

[…]Total student loan debt had reached $10.2 billion and is predicted to grow by an average of $875m a year to more than $20b by 2022.

The report also showed about 39 per cent of students who left tertiary education with a loan did so without achieving a qualification.

About 8000 students with loans who left study in 2005 had nothing to show for it by 2007.

Why can’t Obama take into account how radical leftist policies have worked in other countries? Let the free market work. Let people be responsible for their own decisions. Giving people things for free doesn’t make them take their education seriously. When someone pays out of pocket, they try harder, and they take serious courses to earn the money back. When a bank makes a loan, they actually care about getting the money back, so they may insist that students actually perform. On the other hand, the government is notoriously wasteful – it’s not their money. It’s your money.

News

New York governor unveils one BILLION dollars of new taxes

5 Comments

Story from CBS News. (H/T ECM)

Excerpt:

Governor David Paterson said Tuesday that the days of profligate spending in Albany are over and that starting immediately lawmakers must participate in an “age of accountability.”

That said, the governor’s new budget has $1 billion in new taxes and nearly $800 million in cuts for New York City.

[…]”Our revenues have crumbled and our budget has crashed and we can no longer afford this spending addiction that we have had for so long,” Paterson said.

[…]”The mistakes of the past have lead us to the breaking point,” Paterson said.

But in addition to the severe belt tightening, the governor said he would need to raise $1 billion in new taxes and fees — some politically controversial.

* A $1 increase in the cigarette tax, raising the state tax to $3.75.

* A new soda tax that will cost consumers 1-cent per ounce — a 16-ounce bottle will cost 16 cents more, a 64-ounce bottle 64 cents more.

* The governor also plans to legalize and sanction cage fighting.

* And allow wine to be sold in grocery stores.

* And introduce 50 speed cameras on highways to catch unsuspecting motorists with fines of up to $100.

How did this happen?

New York legislators voted to tax the wealthy.

Then the wealthy left New York for red states.

And now Albany has no revenues to pay for all of their government spending on social programs, such as paying delinquent teachers to do nothing all day because the teacher unions won’t allow teachers to be fired, no matter how badly they screw up.

Governor Patterson never wanted anything to do with earlier tax increases on the wealthy. At least these new tax increases are on consumption, not on income, and not on corporations. Consumption taxes cost the fewest jobs, in my opinion. Consumption taxes encourage saving, too.