ExpandMyWealth.com

A few months ago, I wrote an article on Why Americans are Getting so Fat and mentioned that one of the major factors was due to the increasing high calories, larger portions, and fat quantity of the foods served in restaurants. American restaurants have been more focused on creating foods that taste good rather than being healthy.

Restaurants have even tried to combat the negative press and image associated with high fat diets by coming up with healthier alternatives. But are these alternatives really all that healthy?

Many of these “healthy alternatives” still contain an extremely large amount of calories and high quanities of fat and sugar. Keep in mind that the average person should only consume 2,500 calories per day. When it comes down to it sheer caloric impact is the primary cause of obesity. It makes sense. Excess calories are converted to fat, plain and simple.

So you go to your local Ruby Tuesdays and decide to eat healthy. You pick the Turkey Portobello burger rather than your typical Cheeseburger. Turkey burgers are healthy right? Guess Again… This turkey burger alone packs a whopping 1,145 calories and that’s not including the side of fries!

You would be better off ordering a Big Mac from McDonald’s which only packs 540 calories or even the Whopper from Burger King which is a high 760 calories.

The Turkey Bella from Ruby Tuesdays portobello contains 1,145 calories, 71 grams of fat, and a total of 56 grams of carbs. A much healthier alternative would be the 9-oz sirloin steak with a side of vegetables which would make a total of 256 calories.

McDonalds recently came out with their “ALL WHITEMEAT” Chicken Selects which appear healthier than your traditional Chicken McNuggets, however with the five piece alone they are 830 calories with 55 grams of fat (4.5 trans fat) and 48 grams of carbs. Add an order of regular fries and a soda and your looking at a 1,710 calorie meal!

The five piece Chicken Selects contains just about the same calorie content as the 20 piece Chicken McNuggets. An order of 6 piece Chicken Mcnuggets will save you 530 calories.

The Jamba Juice Chocolate Moo’d Power Smoothie packs a whopping 900 calories. In fact it contains more sugar than 2 pints of Ben & Jerry’s ice cream. There is also 10 grams of fat which some may consider quite low, but also 183 grams of carbs of which 166 grams are sugar.

Looking at the menu at Jamba Juice it is clear that 80 percent of their drinks contain 100 grams of sugar or more. That’s equal to 3 cans of regular cola. I’d avoid this chain and go find yourself a protein shake.

The Macaroni Grill’s “Double Macaroni and Cheese” may seem like a mild alternative, however it packs 1,210 calories with 62 grams of fat and 3,450 mg of sodium. A much better alternative would be their 390 calorie grilled chicken with a side of vegetables.

This simple sandwich packs 1,490 calories, 85 grams of fat, 96 grams of carbs, and 4510 mg of sodium. A typical sandwich should only contain 500 calories max and that includes bread, cheese, and mayonaise. There are many alternatives at Subway which are under 500 calories or less.

Carl’s Jr. has their Six Dollar Burger which is suppose to represent a typical burger that you would get at a Bar & Grill for $6.00, it also represents 1,520 calories with 111 grams of fat. Wow!!! Where do they pack all that fat?!? I guess in the bread. The low carb version of this six dollar burger in a box without the bun, but still with all the other fixings is only 490 calories. My only question is how in the hell do they pack 1,030 calories in the bun?

We saw how the Macaroni Grill was able to pack 1210 calories and 62 grams of fat into their Macaroni & Cheese. So how does their Spaghetti & Meatballs measure up?

They do not disappoint. Their Spaghetti & Meatballs contain a total of 2,430 calories with 128 grams of fat and 207 grams of carbohydrates. This one simple dish can satisfy your calorie requirements for an entire day. This means that you could essentially live off of eating this dish once a day and nothing more. Just kidding.

The Awesome Blossom from Chilli’s. Can you possibly get any worse than this? These fried onions are like sponges for absorbing the cannola oil that they are cooked in. That with the tangy chipotle sauce and you have an artery busting combination. This one starter contains 2,710 calories with 203 grams of fat and 194 grams of carbs. If this is your appetizer than I would hate to see your main course!

Yes, it does get worse! Outback Steakhouse has their Aussie Cheese Fries which are covered in ground beef, chili, and cheese. They are 2,900 calories with 182 grams of fat and a total of 240 carbs.  This is about as bad as it gets…  they must have made this high calorie on purpose.  How could this possibly be an accident?

Many commercial sites out there sell those turnkey PC grow systems for as much as $599.99. I have always thought that these prices are rather ridiculous. The people selling these units are probably investing $124.99 building each system and taking in $450.00 in profit. People are buying them so it’s definitely not a bad business model.

Just take a look at the PC Planter System system below:

The components are simple. PC Computer Case for $29.99, one 50 watt incandescent grow light bulb for $3.95, reflective insulating material $5.95, mini ozone purifier $15.00, housing material for lighting and wiring $20.00, mini two plant hydro resevoir tray system $34.99, humidity & temperature monitor $25.00, computer case fans $5.00, and light timer $7.99. Making the grand total for building this system around $128.00 which is around my original estimate above. So rather than buy one of these over priced systems, why not build your own?

You could do it for far less than $128.00 and have similar results. Let’s try to build a system for under $20.00.

It’s fairly easy to find a really old computer case that someone does not want for free. I had no trouble finding one. After removing a few screws and a few other modifications I had a perfect start for a grow box. I then picked up some styrofoam insulation which I used to line the box on all 4 sides. I also picked up a cheap extension cord, a lamptimer, and a light bulb socket plug adapter which allows me to plug the light bulb directly into the extension cord. I cut a small hole in the top for ventilation. Within 20 minutes my system was practically completed.

I added a regular incandescent light bulb that I obtained from an old lamp to add additional light and some heat to the inside of the grow box. This will improve the results since plants respond so well to a slightly warmer environment. I added a small glass of water to add a slight level of humidity to the inside of the case which the heat from the traditional light bulb would slowly cause to evaporate.

The completed grow system is shown below.

Using this system I was able to get good results, probably not much different than what I would see using the $599.99 system at the top of this post. The biggest difference is that my system uses potting soil and their system is totally hydroponic. However, I was able to get good results and saw my plant flower in around a week. They were strawberry plants of course.

The break down of the total cost to build this system is shown below.  If you do not count the materials that can easily be found for free, such as the old PC case and the lamp then your costs will be around $19.75!

The iPhone is now one of the hottest new phones available today. It is one of Apple’s new top selling products which has greatly increased both their marketshare and stock prices. There are many great uses for iPhones which surpass all other cellphones out there: they are great for listening to music, searching the internet, viewing high-resolution graphics, and most recently viewing porn.

The technological feats of the new iPhones are key to the porn industry. The large high-resolution screen size, speedy Web access, and ease of use make the iPhone more than ideal for looking at porn. The device’s miniaturized version of Apple’s Safari software simplifies mobile access and streamlines the process of tailoring dirty sites for optimal viewing on the go.

“It’s by far the porn-friendliest phone,” says Devan Cypher, representative for San Francisco–based Sin City Entertainment. As evidence of the gadget’s rocketing popularity in California’s porn capital, the San Fernando Valley, numerous iPhone-specific porn sites have been launched in recent months. “There are a few hundred iPhone porn sites now in use,” says Farley Cahen, vice president of business development for AVN Media Network, the adult industry’s trade body. Many others are currently in the works targeting the iPhone 2.0, which goes on sale July 11.

Several leading porn players are getting ready for the 2.0 version of the Apple iPhone. Among them are Penthouse.com, Digital Playground, Pink Visual, and many others. The speed promised by the iPhone 2.0 is much anticipated. Google Trends, which measures Web buzz, shows a sharp increase over the past year in the popularity of the term “iPhone porn.”

Apple spokeswoman Jennifer Bowcock says the company doesn’t condone iPhone porn and will ban adult content from official applications, just as it has restricted adult content in the podcast section of the Apple store. But in no way can it prevent customers from accessing porn through the device’s browser.

The industry sees the iPhone 2.0 as having multiple advantages over the first model. For one thing, Apple’s new gadget is nearly twice as fast as its predecessor at loading Web pages, and even faster at running video, which is crucial for the porn industry. About a third of iPhone users watch video on their phone, according to Nielsen Mobile, which is nearly 10 times the number that watch video on other cell phones. Three out of four iPhone users are men with above-average incomes, and iPhone users spend heavily on entertainment. More than a third of iPhone users shell out more than $100 on phone and data charges every month, as compared with just one-fifth of other cell-phone users.

In 2007, the international market for mobile adult content reached $1.7 billion, according to Juniper, but they also estimate that this market will grow to around $13 billion a year after the 2.0 version of the iPhone hits the market.

The U.S. Treasury Department and Secret Service have battled constantly to stay one step ahead of professional counterfeiters. Recently with high-resolution color copiers and desktop publishing tools there is a new group of amateur counterfeiters out there trying their hand at making fake currency. The Treasury Department is fighting back with the most radical re-designs to the U.S. currency seen in over 60 years.

The 1996 $100 bill was just the first in the new series of bills that the Treasury Department has recently introduced to combat conterfeiting.

Currency Paper

The paper used to make U.S. Currency has a unique feel and is extemely durable. It is not really paper in a traditional sense. There are no wood fibers are starch in currency paper. Instead it is composed of a special blend of cotton and linen fibers. The strength comes from raw materials continuously refined until the special feel of the currency is achieved. Therefore people can easily tell if a bill is real by the distinctive feel of the currency paper. Also the distinctive yellowish-green tint of the ink on this special paper are extremely difficult for color photocopiers and printers to match using other types of paper.

Red and Blue Fibers

Small red and blue fibers found within currency paper make copying currency even more difficult. Some counterfeiters try to mimic these fibers, however closer inspection often reveals that these fibers are drawn on the bills rather than actual physical fibers that are part of the currency paper.

Security Thread

Security threads have been in U.S. currency for quite some time. In the most recent bills they run the entire width of the currency. In earlier bank notes these security threads were added to the actual paper itself and the number of threads would represent the denomination of the bill.

These security threads prevent conterfeiters from bleaching out one dollar bills and attempting to print hundred dollar bills on the original currency paper.

In these new bills the security thread will appear in a different location depending on the denomination of the bill. The thread for the new $100 bill carries the words “USA 100″ and can only be seen with transmitted light, which makes photocopying impossible. In addition, the new security threads glow red when held over ultraviolet light.

Watermarks

A new watermark was added to the 1996 series one hundred dollar bill. This is not a new concept. Watermarks have been used on foreign currency for hundreds of years. The watermark is created during the paper making process and is caused by variations in the density of the paper. As light passes through these tiny variations in thickness, it creates different tones. When held up to transmitted light these varying tones form a clear image — and in the case of the new $100, a second image of Ben Franklin.

Intaglio Printing

Intaglio printing is what gives the U.S. currency its distinctive look. The process begins with an engraving, both of the portrait and of the fine line detail surrounding the bill. The process begins with the engraving of the steel printing plates. A high-viscosity ink is then applied to the plates, the plates are then wiped clean, leaving only ink in the grooves, then pressed with enormous pressure (15,000 psi) which transfers the ink to the paper. This enormous pressure causes the paper to be embossed with the ink, closeup of pouring ink thus giving the ink a distinctive raised feel which other printing techniques cannot duplicate. The very fine engravings appear muddy when reproduced in counterfeit notes. While most of the front and back part of the bill is produced in this way, the Treasury seal, Federal Reserve seal and serial numbers are not printed with the Intaglio process.

Currency Portrait

The portrait on currenct may not seem to be a security feature, but the U.S. Treasury Department maintains that the portrait face is the most recognizable part of money. People will tend to remember faces, and if the bill is counterfeit, they will see that the face is not exactly right. Everyone already associates Ben Franklin with the $100 bill, the U.S. Treasury Department did not want to change the face on the bill. While the faces on some foreign currency change as the countries political climate changes, the U.S. Treasury Department wants to present an image of stability with their currency. Instead, they decided to enlarge the portrait on the new $100. The portrait was painstakingly engraved by Thomas Hipschen, and the U.S. Treasury Department hopes the new enlarged details will make counterfeit bills stand out more clearly from the real thing. By moving the portrait to the left, the face will suffer less wear from folding. The move also makes extra room for the watermark on the right side of the bill.

Color Shifting Ink

Color-shifting ink is perhaps the most “high-tech” of the new security features. The black to green color-shifting is a new and important element of the redesigned $100 bill. Similar types of ink have already been used on foreign currency and even on the latest U.S. passports. The change in color is the result of multi-layered metallic flakes added to the ink. When the bill is tilted, light reflects off these flakes at different wavelengths and changes the color of the ink. This trick is called color diffraction, which is also responsible for the color variations found on the wings of some butterflies. The U.S. Treasury Department has made sure that the special combination of materials and ink is only available to the United States government to make this one feature that will be extremely difficult to counterfeit.

Microprinting

Microprinting appears as just a thin line to the naked eye, but can be easily read upon magnification. The introduction of microprinting on U.S. currency begain in 1990 with the addition of the words “The United States of America” printed around the edge of the portraits. The new bills still use microprinting, but in a different location around Ben Franklin’s lapel. In addition, the words “USA 100″ are printed within the lower left “100.” Microprinting is very difficult to reproduce accurately on photocopiers because most copiers do not have the ability to work at such a high resolution. This situation may not last long, because improved scanning devices are now able to print at finer detailed level. The Treasury hopes the combination of the many anti-replication features will continue to deter potential counterfeiters in the future.

Fine Line Engraving

Fine circular lines appear around the portrait of the bill. The clarity and detail of these lines are difficult for scanners and photocopiers to reproduce. These lines often cause a blur during the scanning process.

Serial Numbers and Treasury Seal

The serial number is especially important for banks which handle large amounts of cash. No two serial numbers are the same. On the new bills, these serial numbers have been increased to 11 digits.

In addition, the new bills contain a redesigned image of Treasury sealFederal Reserve seal and code which indicate the bill’s issuing bank. While the old bills contain this information, on the new bills the numbers are clearer and easier to identify. The old green Treasury seal hidden behind the “100″ has long been part of U.S currency and will remain an important security feature. This detailed combination of green and black is difficult to reproduce. Like all overt features, however, the new bills will require continuous upgrades and additions as new technology arises that makes the features more vulnerable.

Fake Hundred Dollar Bill

Using the information from the article above can you find all the features which show that the hundred dollar bill below is a fake?

There are five things wrong with the hundred dollar bill above.

FRONT OF BILL

1) The Federal Reserve Bank seal should designate the entire system not one particular bank. It would be fine on an older version of the bill, which features the individual seal of the bank to which the note was issued. But with the new bills a universal seal representing the entire Federal Reserve System should be in its place.

2) The Serial Number does not contain enough letters. The serial number should include 11 letters and numbers. The new sequence will include two letters in the front (instead of one), eight numbers, and one letter at the end.

3) Two numerals are found on the old bills are on the right side of the bill, but should not be on new currency. Instead, a watermark of Benjamin Franklin, which can be seen when the bill is held up to a light should be there. A watermark is hard to counterfeit because it does not photocopy.

4) The misspelled word “DOLLER” (should be DOLLAR) on the lower right hand corner of the bill.

BACK OF BILL

5) The clock is missing from the tower. Details are important to foil counterfeiters. Among the new features added, many include fine detail, such as microprinting and concentric lines.

It has taken over 18 months, but arrests have finally been made in the murder of Matthew Toste who was gunned down in a downtown Santa Rosa parking lot in December 2006.

This killing has elevated concerns about the expansion of violent gang activity in Santa Rosa and the safety of the downtown area. It has also shown the increasing violence and criminal activity which has grown around Seventh Street since the opening of the Seven Ultra Lounge.

A criminal grand jury recently handed down indictments against five Santa Rosa men — Joseph Kenneth Lopez Sr., 39; his son, Joseph Kenneth Lopez Jr., 19; Paul Whiterock, 28; Nicholas Mejia, 30; and Raul Lopez-Granados, 20 — accusing them of murder, participating in a criminal street gang; conspiring to commit assault with a deadly weapon and other offenses.

If convicted on all counts, the five could end up spending the rest of their lives in prison.

It’s an encouraging development. The public has struggled to understand why it has taken such a long time to file charges in a killing that occurred in such a public place and with so many apparent witnesses on hand.

According to the indictment, all five men “talked about going to Club Seven Ultra Lounge that night to get retaliation against rival gang members for beating up Nico Mejia.” The indictment didn’t clarify the allegation, although police earlier said the men were waiting for rivals they knew were going to be leaving the Seven Ultra Lounge later that night. They were intending on attacking these rivals once they entered the parking lot to return to their cars.

However, that Saturday night, Toste, 32, a Santa Rosa father of a 5-year-old boy, had attended a company Christmas party at the Hyatt Vineyard Creek Hotel after which he and three others headed for Seven Ultra Lounge. Police say that after they parked at the Seventh Street parking garage, two women in his group were confronted by five gang members who made sexually provocative comments.

When one grabbed one of the women on the bottom, words were exchanged and punches were thrown. At one point, Toste reportedly cold-cocked Lopez Sr. That’s when someone — who police believe was Lopez Jr. — shot Toste twice in the chest.

Lopez Jr. and Whiterock were arrested as suspects within hours after the shooting, but they were later released.

The defendents are show below (click on a photo to see the full sized image):

Joseph Kenneth Lopez Sr.

Joseph Kenneth Lopez Jr.

Nicholas Mejia

Paul Whiterock

Raul Lopez Granados

Mejia said he was shot three times in the back of the right leg, all around the knee.

“I got shot three times in the back of the leg, walking away,” Mejia said.

“I’m a victim, too,” he said. “I didn’t even come with them. I came by myself in my own car. I was going to the club, but everybody goes to the club. It’s a small town.”

Santa Rosa Police homicide Sgt. Paul Henry confirmed Tuesday that Mejia was one of two defendants who were wounded by gunfire and that no one in the Toste party was armed.

The indictment accuses Lopez Jr. of firing the shots that killed Toste.

Henry declined to directly challenge or confirm most of what Mejia said, saying he didn’t want to damage the case as it heads toward trial.

Mejia said he was interviewed in the hospital, where police swabbed his hands in a test for gunshot residue. He also said police examined his car and apparently found nothing incriminating.

“I was never even being charged with this until this grand jury stuff came up,” he said. “I’m seeing all this stuff and they’re making me look guilty. They checked me for gun residue at the hospital, and there was none of that.”

Henry said Mejia’s explanations don’t square with evidence detectives have gathered.

“It sounds like the information he’s providing you is contrary to the information we’re working with,” he said, declining to be more specific. “It will come out at some point, if this case ever goes to trial. Or it will come out as not based in fact, if he pleads guilty.”

The indictment also accuses Lopez Jr., Lopez-Granados and Mejia of attempted murder in a Nov. 16, 2006, shooting. Mejia said he wasn’t involved in, and was never questioned about, that case.

The reason for the delay in the filing of charges will likely become more apparent as details of the case are released during trial. What’s important is that police investigators did not give up, and they deserve praise for vigorously pursuing this case until criminal indictments were secured.