Late tuition hike hurts students

In regard to the article “Late regent tuition decision not healthy for UI students” (DI, July 25), I agree with your statement that it is unfair to students for the state to announce tuition increases so late in the year.

Although I completely agree with your statement, I would like to respectfully propose an alternative point of argument. I do not feel that your point about students not being able to afford a vacation is strong enough to raise attention to the subject. There are thousands of students at this university who have much greater worries because of a tuition increase than whether they can afford a vacation. Most students, including me, worry more about how much of an increase we are going to have in student debt, how we are going to pay for our next month’s rent, or how we are going to afford groceries to eat this week because of these tuition increases.

The truth be told is that not just I but thousands of other students at universities across Iowa agree with your statement. Not only is it already stressful enough to find out that I and many others have to figure out how to cover even more costs of tuition, then to find out at such a later time makes the news all the more painful. There are so many more important things that students have to stress about in school, such as getting their degrees, than stressing about not being able to afford their next university bill. If we are going to be told that our costs of tuition are increasing, then we must demand to be informed at an earlier time so that we may properly prepare for those increases.

I strongly encourage all students across the state of Iowa to stand up, come together, and create a petition that requests earlier release of information regarding increases in tuition. The quality of our education is very important, and obviously, it costs more money to afford quality educators, but the quantity of students who receive that education is the most important. The lower the cost of education gets, the higher the number of people who receive that education is.

Tanner Smith

Who is really omnipotent, after all?

Our society does not throw people in prison because someone does not agree with them. The spectacle of the mob on the floor of the Trump convention fanatically contending a need to imprison a candidate of the other party reveals a danger to the American people’s lives that comes of a cult of personality joined with a hate-filled man in the manner that in the past produced a ghastly Nazi Holocaust in Germany.

This hysteria joined with Trump’s histrionics presented as ugly of a display as that of the mob of Scripture that screamed “crucify him.” And then and there in response to that chant, two of our fellow sinners were atop Calvary nailed to crosses on the right and left of the crucified perfect one.

And though the Sun went dark and curtain of the temple was torn in two marking that as day of the Sorrow of sorrows, it was neither the first nor last on which some suffered greatly from the cruelty inflict by others.

Many decades prior to that dark Friday, thousands of slaves struggling to be free were crucified along 130 miles of the Appian Way from Rome to Capua, and many centuries after that in all-too-recent times millions of fellow humans were carted off to concentration camps and efficiently burned in hell on Earth.

In place of spreading hateful disregard for our fellow humans while atop terra firma, better we be more intent on spreading love, concern and what bits of understanding we can muster.

And do so in forsake of unleashing endless streams of vituperative incrimination from mouths willing to feign to be all knowing of the failings of others.

Ted Cruz, regardless of personal intent attributed to him, has counseled what in good spirit we voting citizen had best take to heart: We each should exercise our own conscience when in November we cast our presidential ballots.  For Cruz having issued this advice, he has been reviled and reviled again and again by one who has grandly presented himself before his screaming assemblage as God Almighty Trump pretending to be omniscient, omnipotent and fanatically bent on being omnipresent in our lives, whether any of us like it or not.

Sam Osborne

Fighting the modified-food battle

Kudos to the author of this piece (DI, July 20) for writing about the importance of looking at the right things when it comes to the argument over genetically modified organisms.

The article references a bill that, if signed into law, would require all modified food to be labeled as such. This makes sense for most people who are against genetically modified products, because they would be able to more easily decide what food not to buy. However, as the author states, this isn’t necessarily the smartest way to view or decide on what food to buy because it still doesn’t tell you what is in the food or how it’s modified, it simply adds a QR code onto the food (which the author accurately emphasizes that nobody uses). The bill might make genetically modified food more easily identifiable, but as the author states, that shouldn’t be what drives you in deciding the food you eat; actual nutrition facts and the ingredients that go into food are what’s really important.

The author uses a statistic saying 88 percent of scientists believe genetically modified organisms to be safe, while 37 percent of the general public believed that, and it goes to show how people love to have opinions on things they don’t fully understand. If a doctor said you have cancer you wouldn’t think, “Ehh I don’t really think I do, so I don’t believe you.” Science is a heavily scrutinized field, yet people always love to provoke controversy in many scientific conversations.

Ultimately, I recommend readers to make smart decisions on the food they buy, based on the actual ingredients. I recommend they eat healthy food options and not to decide on buying something because it has or doesn’t have a label. As the author said, a genetically modified carrot is going to be healthier than a non-modified cookie.

Nick Lodi