Mandatory Human Chip Implants Essay

The idea of mandatory human chip implants is wrong on so many different levels. Not only is there a major concern about how it will affect the privacy of society, but also how much we don’t know about the adverse effects on the actual human body. Another major concern is the public backlash that can be expected from all religious bodies and communities. This is why we as a society must stand up for what we believe is right, and what is right is that mandatory human chip implants cannot and will not be tolerated. One of the biggest issues with mandatory human chip implants is privacy issues and concerns. Many questions immediately come up whenever the topic arises. What organization or body of government controls the data stored from these chips? Is the information stored in the chip safe and secure? Can my information be stolen and or sold? As of right now the only chip approved for humans in a medical application is the â€Å"Verichip†. The Verichip is a chip comparable to the size of a grain of rice. It is a fairly simple device that consists of only a coiled wire and a hermetically sealed microchip inside a glass casing. It uses the coil as an antenna to create a radio signal that is unique. This unique signal can be transmitted and received to identify a person’s medical records if they are in some sort of dire state in which they could not communicate efficiently.(Foster, Kenneth R. 2007,March) This could save so many lives in the medical field simply by pulling up a patient’s records and receiving this signal. In a perfect world this would work correctly and only for good intentions but, the way we as a society constantly strive to streamline every aspect of our life, where would it stop? The notion or idea is that it would replace driver’s licenses or bank atm and debit cards. Social security numbers, birth certificates, bank account numbers, basically your entire life. As technology continues to grow and advance, how secure can these chips really be? If someone was able to steal your signal they would be able to do so many things with the information stored in it. Your life would be stolen in the blink of an eye. Also, another terrifying realization is if the signal is stolen or locked on to, you could be followed or tracked. This is very unsettling if we cannot be sure how safe this information really is. Would you really want someone  to know where you or your loved ones are at all times? What if some sick individual was watching your child or children? The possibilities are endless in these scenarios. So with no guarantee on how secure the information stored in these chips really is, this is one of the many reasons why there should not be mandatory human chip implants. Another strong arguing point on this subject is health concerns. With these devices being as small as they are, there is not enough data to prove that they are not a health concern. There is lots of data about these chips that should raise some eyebrows, as well as the manner in which they were approved by the FDA. Back in 2005 when the FDA approved human chip implants they claimed with â€Å"†reasonable assurance† the device was safe. The one thing they failed to mention in that claim was that studies going back to the mid-nineties directly links these chip implants with cancer. Many studies and research showed that one in six lab rats developed tumors because of the implanted chip. So how could this slip by the FDA you ask? According to Lewan (2007), well back in 2005 when it was brought before the FDA for approval, the head of the Department of Health and Human Services at the time which presided over the FDA, was a man by the name of Tommy Thompson. Well two weeks af ter the approval of the chip in humans, Thompson left his position at the DHHS to become a board member of VeriChip Corp. and Applied Digital Solutions. Even though it was five months later, he was compensated with cash and stock options from the companies. Can we chalk this up as a coincidence? I don’t think so. With all the facts and research done on this particular subject I find it hard to believe that the FDA did not come across any of this information before approving human chip implants. So with the data already in front of us claiming to link these chips with cancer in lab rats, can we honestly agree to be implanted ourselves? Finally, the thought or notion of human chip implants would cause a huge backlash in our religious communities. Just recently in Virginia, there was a public outcry against mandatory micro-chipping that caused the House of Representatives to vote on the subject matter. Krunkle , (2010) wrote, Del. Mark L. Cole (R-Fredericksburg), the bill’s sponsor, is quoted saying â€Å"My understanding — I’m not a theologian — but there’s a prophecy in the Bible  that says you’ll have to receive a mark, or you can neither buy nor sell things in end times,† Cole said. â€Å"Some people think these computer chips might be that mark.†(p.1) In our society, religion is at times, a very controversial and touchy subject matter between religious communities. There will be millions of people who will become distraught if human chip implants become mandatory. Our country has so many different religious cultures that it would directly effect. Are we r eally ready for the consequences that will follow if this eventually happens? In conclusion, we as a society need to stand up to what we consider right from wrong. So is it wrong to make someone have a chip implanted so they can buy or sell things in order for them to survive even though it goes against their religious beliefs? Or is it wrong for these chips to be approved for humans even though there is substantial evidence that it could cause cancer. The answer is entirely up to us. My conclusion is that yes, it is completely wrong. Not only does it violate our ethical privacy rights as human beings, it also causes so many concerns medically and spiritually. We cannot allow this to come to fruition. We have to stand up for ourselves and our beliefs and say no to mandatory human chip implants to protect our future generations to come. References Foster, Kenneth R (2007, March) The murky ethics of implanted chips. IEEE spectrum. Retrieved from http://pages.cs.wisc.edu/~markhill/cs252/Spring2013/handouts/spectrum07_rfid_ethics.pdf Holtzman, David H (2008). Human ID chips get under my skin, BusinessWeek Online, 5-5(1). Krunkle, Frederick (2010). Human chips seen by some in Virginia House as device of antichrist, The Lewan, Todd (2007). Chip implants linked to animal tumors, The Washington Post Washington Post

The Exit from Quantitative Easing

The exit from CEQ was primarily conducted by reducing rapidly the most flexible asset on the Boss's balance sheet which Is the amount of Its bills purchases from private banks, to match the rapid decline in the amount of excess serves. The advantage of this strategy was that the exit of CEQ was predominantly limited to Just one item on the Boss's balance sheet and that the balance sheet adjustments were conducted through operations directly with the banking sector, which facilitated the management of the exit process.Intentionally, the BOX chose to reduce its holdings of Japanese government securities very slowly and moderately in order not to distort supply and demand conditions in Japanese bond markets. In fact, the BOX kept In place Its regular purchases of long-term Japanese government bonds. It realized the gradual reduction of Japanese government securities on Its balance sheet mainly by reducing the amount of short-term Japanese government securities. The BOX implemented certa in new liquidity providing operations in order to promote the proper functioning and stability of interbrain money markets.The Japanese experience shows that when exiting from CEQ, a central bank needs to consider very carefully how to restore the functioning of these crucial markets, as one result of CEQ may be that activity in interbrain markets becomes very subdued. All in all, the exit room CEQ in Japan has been considered a success and its experience may serve as a useful example for other central banks. Fernando Gutsurge del Arroyo Gong;leg provided excellent statistical support. The views expressed in this note are solely the responsibility of the author and should not be Interpreted as reflecting the views of the Bank of Spain.After having followed a zero interest rate policy strategy and facing a further deteriorating economy in an environment of falling prices (deflation), the Bank of Japan (BOX) announced the introduction of CEQ on 19 March 2001 and kept it in place until 9 March 2006. The Japanese version of CEQ consisted of the following elements, such as published by the Boo]: 1) Monetary policy target: The current account balances (CABs = required + excess bank reserves) became the operating instrument of Japanese monetary policy, replacing the overnight institutionalized call rate.

Cohesion policy good and bad practices

Introduction: Lithuania (along with the other Baltics) is the success story of EIJ structural fund absorption. Bulgaria (along with Romania) is the worst performer. Lithuania has contracted projects for 87% (‚Â ¬6_4 billion) of available funds as of November 2012 and paid out 54% (‚Â ¬4 billion) to beneficiaries. Bulgaria absorbed only ‚Â ¬2 billion of an available ‚Â ¬9. 5 billion between 2007 and 2011. Key factors affecting absorption capacity of structural funds: I _ Use of pre-accesslon funds 2 Political will 3. wealth/polltlcal legitimacy of regions . Human resources 5. Knowledge of available funds 6. corruption and transparency 7. r Is It Just a question of TIME (and size)? Bulgaria: Joined EU in 2007 having spent very little ot its pre-accession aid. Multiple corruption and transparency scandals: tunds are withheld and projects are delayed. Change ot government in July 2009 with creation ot new administrative units to handle structural funds. The qu ality of human resources is low in regional/municipal administrations: 4% speak English, the same people used for planning as for valuation, 201 1 sees improvements: 27 municipal information centres set up, number of prosecutions over misappropriation of funds increasing (but the absorption rate slightly lower than 2010).Lithuania: ELI member since May 2004. Population 3. 2 million compared to Bulgaria's 7. 5 million. Flexible economy: experienced rapid growth before the 2009 crisis (with help of pre-accesslon fundsL and rebounded relatively quickly after huge contraction. In 2004-06 priority was accorded to spending EIJ money according to all rules and procedures. Start of 007-2013 programming period absorption rate was similar to EUIO average (approx. 45%)

Parallel Universes Essay Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 500 words

Parallel Universes - Essay Example ing with private life issues continue to pose a great challenge in the legal setting bearing in mind that there is no standard regulations to handle similar cases. The Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment regulates interference with privacy by stipulating that no state has the capacity to deprive anyone life, liberty, or property without due execution of the law (Williams, 2010). In a school setting, the substantive due process offers the state some powers to regulate certain activities hence effective handling of teachers’ controversial lifestyles that might interfere with reputation or ability to perform. In cases of dismissal or charges against any teacher adequate explanation of the evidence must be provided though the due process does not prescribe reasons for dismissal apart from the procedures (Alexander & Alexander, 2011). The law provides directions to regulate behavior while at times it may not be very effective in explaining to what extent the standards of behavior should be. At times double standardization is evident though the law plays its part by dictating the necessary procedures. The school officials must be very vigilant when dealing with out-of-school’s conduct since not all jurisdictions have adopted the nexus theory. The nexus theory holds it that teacher’s off-duty conduct might negatively affect his/her teaching effectiveness hence the need to discipline behaviors (Elis, 2010). In regard to the precepts of the theory, more emphasis is attached to the impact of the teacher’s off-duty conduct hence disciplining in equal measure. The community standards also influence to a great extent issues involving teachers’ out-of-school conduct. Depending with the responsiveness and awareness of the community to initiate a course of action towards out of conduct issues, behaviors may be encouraged or discouraged. For instance, as illustrated in the table the response is not equal in weight in the rural setting as compared with the