TBO.com - TBO is Tampa Bay Online

Highlands Today

Are Old Men Really That Grumpy? Maybe Not

ADVERTISEMENT

The Tampa Tribune

Published: September 6, 2008

Here are excerpts from editorials in newspapers in Florida:

The Florida Times-Union, on a study showing that grumpy old men are not so grumpy after all:
Grumpy old men are famous for being grumpy old men.

But a new study says older guys are happier in later life than older women.

The study headed by researchers from the University of Cambridge in England and the University of Southern California analyzed decades of national statistics on men and women regarding satisfaction with family and finances, USA Today reported.

The study said women are more likely than men to be happier in their 20s. But by 41, the financial satisfaction for men exceeded the level of women and, by 48, men are happier overall than women.

By age 64, men are also more typically satisfied with family life than women, says the study, to be published in an upcoming issue of the Journal of Happiness Studies.

One consolation for women: They tend to live at least five years longer than men.

Regardless of what the study indicates, there's good news for both sexes: Happiness is often more about choice than age or circumstances.

The (Fort Myers) News-Press, on maintaining restaurant inspections in Florida:

...Healthinspections.com, a public-service Web site, has ranked Florida No. 1 on its "The Most Dangerous States For Eating Out" list three years in a row.

But restaurant industry representatives and state regulators say the list is misleading. They make some valid points:

Florida leads other states in required training for foodservice workers and in reporting suspected and confirmed outbreaks of food-borne illness. In May, Florida's program was among only six out of 306 food regulatory programs nationwide that met a majority of Food and Drug Administration standards.

And Florida has very stringent reporting standards compared to many other states, where standards can vary from county to county.

Nonetheless, health inspectors should continue holding restaurants to high standards. So should the public, which has easy access to inspection reports....

Some of the listed violations are worse than others. But restaurants can, and should, strive for perfect scores. A commitment is all that's needed.

The (Lakeland) Ledger, on taxpayers footing a big part of the bill for the two political conventions:

As voters watch the expensive sets and glitz of the national political parties' conventions, they may wonder who's paying for all this. The answer: They are.

Taxpayers are footing a large share of the bill for the conventions, and they shouldn't have to. To begin with, each convention will get more than $16 million in federal money to help pay for convention operations. To make matters worse, Congress voted to appropriate $50 million in Homeland Security funds to pay for security at each convention.

There's really no reason for this expense when money is tight and the federal government operates at a tremendous deficit.

The conventions are no longer a decision-making part of the election process. Nominees have long been set. The Democratic National Convention last week and the Republican National Convention this week are nothing more than political theater. They are scripted campaign commercials on free network television time.

While the federal government is operating in the red, the campaigns are awash in revenue. Both presidential campaigns are raising tens of millions of dollars each month. They and their parties should pay for their conventions.

But taxpayers aren't covering the entire tab. Public money will be matched by the millions that corporations, trade associations and unions pay to wine and dine elected officials and to sponsor parties during the convention.

Congress banned "soft money," unregulated large gifts to political parties, a few years ago, but it created an exception for political conventions.

The money comes from all over the nation, not just from those interested in boosting the host cities. Corporations and unions use this exception to buy access by hosting parties for the key players in Washington and lawmakers who regulate industry and labor.

This is the political money game at its most obvious - large corporate and union donations gathered greedily by the parties, which respond by granting access to policymakers and highly placed officials. Those who have the money to buy access get heard by those in power. Of course, the politicians pulling in this money have rewarded their donors by making these payments tax deductible. And they even changed the law to allow corporate donors to hide their sponsorship of some convention events.

These donations make it even more unnecessary to charge taxpayers more than $130 million to help finance these two events. Clearly the parties and candidates have enough millions in their campaign chests and in the pockets of lobbyists eager to buy influence that they could have left public funding alone.

Share this:

Loading Comments...

Email Print

ADVERTISEMENT