Many of these financing companies lent out money to consumers with very little regard for the Three C’s of Credit – Character, based on history of repaying debts; Capacity, the amount of debt that a consumer can comfortably afford to handle; and Capital, the current assets a consumer has.

If you happened to be a homeowner, you could get even more financing dollars by getting a HELOC – or home equity – loan that allowed you to borrow outrageous amounts of money based on the value of your home, sometimes up to 125% of its estimated value.

With this free flowing credit, consumers gorged on a buffet of spending. Whether it was to finance dream vacations, to purchase the latest electronic device or to pay for a night out on the town, the cash is long gone. Now all that remains of the ‘good time’ is a credit card bill with a high interest rate.

These companies helped facilitate the ability to “live beyond your means” as a lifestyle with no forethought as to what might happen should market conditions change, and now they’re left with a bag of burning poop on their doorstep as the economy has shifted.

They’ve addressed the issue by tightening their belts. They’ve canceled credit cards, decreased credit lines and increased interest rates, even on customers that have paid on time consistently.

It’s another reason people should rethink how they are doing business and about what products they choose to consume. Being an overweight, debt ridden consumer was never the American Dream, but somehow it has become a reality.

Cutting back simply can’t hurt and credit card companies aren’t your friend – they’re like the drug dealer that gives you the first hit for free knowing that you’re going to get hooked and give you enough rope to hang yourself if you aren’t careful.

William Shakespeare artfully said, “Neither a borrower, or a lender be.”

I believe he had things right.

The agency is not requiring labeling or any other additional measures for food from cattle, swine, and goat clones, or their offspring because food derived from these sources is no different from food derived from conventionally bred animals. Should a producer express a desire for voluntary labeling (e.g., “this product is clone-free”), it will be considered on a case-by-case basis to ensure compliance with statutory requirements that labeling be truthful and not misleading.

Right now if you order meat, you have no way of knowing if it came from cloned animals, or not. And according to the FDA, it’s exactly as safe as the original. Since cloning animals is now considered to be status quo, it might be worth a look at the disadvantages of cloning animals.

• Clones are not as viable as fresh offspring. Estimates currently say that about 1 out of 90 clones survive. It’s a vast improvement from the original total of 1 out of 276 tried it took to clone Dolly, but it’s still not the most effective of raising animals for food production
• Cloning represents a loss of genetic diversity. A major loss in genetic diversity can cause a species to be less disease resistant
• Clones are not always exact replicas of the original. Randomness can cause genetic variations, even amongst clone offspring.
• Some studies have found that clones are prone to disease.
• Some studies show that clones die younger than normal animals
• Cloned animals don’t behave like their parents. For pet owners who wish to clone beloved animals, many anecdotal reports show that the new animal is nothing like the original behaviorally

Animal cloning is troubling from technical issues, but it’s also a big concern from an ethical standpoint. The European Group on Ethics in Science and New Technologies (EGE) has taken a stand on the ethics of cloning animals.

The EGE Opinion concludes that “considering the current level of suffering and health problems of surrogate dams and animal clones, the EGE has doubts as to whether cloning animals for food supply is ethically justified. Whether this applies also to progeny is open to further scientific research. At present, the EGE does not see convincing arguments to justify the production of food from clones and their offspring.” The EGE also identifies requirements for future action should food from cloned animals be introduced into Europe in the future.

Despite the disadvantages of animal cloning, the process has already been introduced into the American food supply, without the requirement of proper labeling. Consumers don’t even get the choice of deciding whether they would prefer traditionally raised animal products, or cloned ones. The FDA ruled in the favor of introducing clones to our food system, despite complaints from scores of scientists.

“Although the products of cloned animals and their progeny will most likely be safe for human consumption, we would like to see more comprehensive studies, specifically designed to examine food safety,” Dr. Margaret Mellon, Director of UCS’s Food and Environment Program said in 2006. “If consumers aren’t going to be told if their meat is from a clone, FDA has to be certain that meat is safe.”

Despite a great number of disadvantages to cloning animals, it looks like the practice will continue to grow in popularity in coming years.