LOS ANGELES (AP) — Tamara Lawrance is a busy young British actor. In the first few years of her career, she played a fictional girlfriend to Prince Harry in the 2017 TV movie “King Charles III,” and was in an episode of filmmaker Steve McQueen’s 2020 “Small Axe” anthology. Glowing reviews met each performance, as they have for the three-part miniseries called “The Long Song,” airing Sunday on PBS. The drama is set in the final days of slavery in 19th-century Jamaica and stars Lawrance as July, from her early years working in a plantation owner’s house to liberated later life.
Florida Water Adventure Camp (ages 14-18 years), set for June 15-26 at Florida state parks Joint Reserve Teen Leadership Summit (ages 14-18 years), set for June 28-July 3 at Wahsega 4-H Center, Dahlonega, GeorgiaAir Force Reserve/Air National Guard Summit Classic (ages 14-18 years), set for July 12-17 at Wahsega 4-H Center, Dahlonega, GeorgiaOperation Purple Camp (ages 9-12 years), set for July 12-17 at Rock Eagle 4-H Center, Eatonton, GeorgiaMilitary Youth High Adventure Camp (ages 12-15 years), set for July 19-23 at Wahsega 4-H Center, Dahlonega, GeorgiaAir Force Reserve/Air National Guard Summit Adventure (ages 14-18 years), set for August 11-16 at Cheley Colorado Camps, Estes Park, ColoradoCoastal Georgia Adventure Camp (ages 7-17 years), set for Sept. 25-27 at UGA Marine Extension, Skidaway Island, GeorgiaFor more information, including eligibility requirements and registration, visit georgia4h.org/military/summercamps/. Contact Brian Stone at (706) 542-7832 or email@example.com, or Marilyn Huff-Waller at (706) 542-3611 or firstname.lastname@example.org with questions. By Charlotte CastroUniversity of GeorgiaGeorgia 4-H has scheduled a wide variety of camps this summer that are geared specifically toward military youth. The camps are part of University of Georgia Extension’s Military Outreach Program and are offered at no cost to youth of Georgia military members.UGA Extension Military Outreach Program 2015 summer camps are scheduled as follows:
April 1, 2004 Gary Blankenship Senior Editor Regular News House Judiciary sends lawyer advertising bill to the floor House Judiciary sends lawyer advertising bill to the floor Senior Editor A bill imposing a civil fine for lawyer advertisements that “incite” Florida residents to file lawsuits has cleared the House Judiciary Committee and been sent to the House floor. HB 1357, sponsored by Rep. David Simmons, D-Altamonte Springs, was placed on the committee’s agenda March 16, and heard by the committee two days later. The bill was substantially rewritten from its original form, both by Simmons and through amendments offered by committee members. After passage by the committee it was placed on the House Special Order Calendar for action by the full chamber on March 23, after this News went to press. “This bill intends to deal only with the very discrete issue of trying to stir up litigation, not with prohibiting an attorney from advertising,” Simmons said, adding it would not affect attorneys advertising for, say, estate or real estate transaction work. He said the bill is an extension of the common law principle, which is codified in Bar rules, prohibiting direct solicitation of clients. “The idea of trying to incite litigation through communication is really no different than trying to incite litigation through [direct solicitation],” Simmons said. “It’s like the attorney going through the back door to do what common law has prohibited from time immemorial.” He also said, “This legislation goes further than what The Florida Bar rules and regulations do. I always believe what is done here is a more simple, straightforward way of dealing with a discrete issue.” And while the Bar has good lawyer advertising regulations, Simmons said, it does not have the resources to keep up with policing lawyer ads. As originally drafted, the bill made any violation a first degree misdemeanor and it applied to any ad, electronic or in any other media, that encouraged a client to use a lawyer or a law firm’s services. Simmons prepared an amendment for the meeting that changed violations to a civil infraction with a $1,000 penalty for each violation. He also narrowed the scope to apply to ads that encourage “a person to consider bringing legal action against another.” Public service ads and ads that give only an attorney’s or law firm’s name, area of practice, and relates that an injured or aggrieved person can seek redress if his or her rights have been violated would be exempted from the law. Simmons proposed that The Florida Bar and any Florida resident be authorized to go to court to be able to seek the $1,000 fine, with the advertising attorney also paying the Bar’s or the resident’s legal fees and costs if a court found the ad violated the law. The committee voted 12-6, over Simmons’ objection, to accept an amendment from Rep. Jack Seiler, D-Pompano Beach, that only the Bar and the Florida attorney general would have standing to enforce the law. The committee also approved an amendment from Rep. Kevin Ambler, R-Tampa, that would also give the Bar and attorney general authority to seek injunctions against offending ads. The final bill passed the committee unanimously. Its future, however, is doubtful as no Senate companion bill had been introduced by News deadline. Some committee members questioned whether the proposed law would violate the free speech protections of the First Amendment. Simmons said he tailored the law to conform with U.S. Supreme Court requirements set out in Central Hudson Gas & Electric Corp. v. Public Service Commission of New York, 447 U.S. 557 (1980). In that case, the court set out a three-prong test for restricting commercial speech, including that such regulations must be narrowly tailored and use the least restrictive means to achieve the government’s goals. Simmons said that is one reason the bill changed its criminal penalties to civil ones, as that would have a lesser impact on free speech. One of the most hotly debated items was Seiler’s amendment that removed any citizen’s ability to go to court over an ad. Simmons said it was key, in his opinion, to empower residents to act as “private attorneys general” to enforce the law, noting the legislature had enacted similar provisions in other laws. “If you are going to have these rampant violations, you should have the public be able to take it upon themselves to right these wrongs,” he said. But other members disagreed. Rep. Dan Gelber, D-Miami Beach, said if the penalty is only $1,000 per commercial, then lawyers could see that as just a minor “surcharge.” “It could really become a cost of doing business to the firm,” he said. “They could do it the wrong way and pay only $1,000.” Other members said it could lead to a flood of litigation as residents rush to the courthouse to collect the $1,000 fine, plus the costs and legal fees the losing attorney would be required to pay. Seiler said it might place residents as risk. If 50 residents file over one ad, the first successful one could collect the $1,000 payment, but the advertising attorney then might seek fees and costs from the other 49 since, according to Simmons’ explanation, they would not be entitled to additional $1,000 fines. Rep. Phillip Brutus, D-North Miami, asked why residents were being given the right to sue when they were not directly harmed by the ads. Seiler’s amendment to give only the Bar and the attorney general standing to enforce the law passed 12-6. Ambler proposed the amendment giving the Bar and attorney general authority to seek injunctions to halt the broadcasting of ads that violate the law, and Simmons endorsed that change. Ambler and other members said that would provide more enforcement teeth. But he also criticized the bill and said it raises serious constitutional questions. “I applaud what you’re trying to do and I recognize that. . . nobody likes the fact there are ads out there that we feel bring discredit on us and our profession,” Ambler said. “At the same time, I’m concerned if you have a few termites in the house, you don’t burn the house down to cure the problem.” Ambler asked about a lawyer ad that might point out a defective product and then invite those who may have been injured to contact that law firm for further information or help. “Yes, it does violate the [proposed] law,” Simmons said. “There is a very simple alternative to the one you gave. This statute provides the ability to do a public service announcement. . . and then not follow up and say ‘Please come and see me.’ “There is a big difference in my mind, and I believe in everyone’s mind, in trying to seek someone to file a lawsuit and providing information.” Ambler replied that commercial free speech is still protected speech, although not as much as noncommercial speech. He also argued that lawyers advertising for clients is no different that doctors advertising to treat victims of defective products or accidents. Simmons disagreed, saying, “There is a big difference between telling someone to come in and get medical attention and inciting and stirring up litigation.” The bill began by making a specific legislative finding on why a law on lawyer advertising is needed. That section reads: “The legislature, after careful study, has determined that legal advertising that solicits business, by inciting a person to file a suit, destroys the personal responsibility of the public, fosters frivolous litigation, and demeans the judiciary and the practice of law. This form of solicitation has created a crisis in this state’s judicial system, thus creating a compelling state interest in the state’s limited regulation of advertising as set forth in this section.” The bill also defines solicit as “to entreat, request, or urge another to use the services of an attorney or a law firm.” The Florida Bar had staff from its advertising and lawyer regulation operations available at the meeting, but committee members did not ask any questions of them. The only nonlegislative speaker on the bill was Jeff Scott, representing the Florida Medical Association. He endorsed the measure, saying it would improve doctor-patient relationships and discourage medical malpractice litigation in cases where there was a bad outcome for the patient but no malpractice. Veteran Bar Board of Governors member Jesse Diner was in Tallahassee on other business and happened to stop in and watch the debate over the law. While sympathetic with attempts to reign in distasteful attorney advertising, he doubts the legislation will do any good, despite the legislative finding set out in the bill. “I think by just putting in self-serving language about attorney advertising inciting lawsuits, the matter still won’t pass constitutional muster,” he said. While the amendments did improve the bill, Diner said, “I am hopeful this is a bill that won’t pass, not because I don’t think advertising should be regulated. I think advertising can be detrimental to the profession and I don’t particularly favor advertising. But I think you have to take into account the First Amendment of the Constitution and the U.S. Supreme Court decisions.” And with personal injury and medical malpractice cases making up less than 8 percent of all cases nationwide, Diner said lawmakers lack empirical evidence that lawyer advertising is crowding the courts with cases.
Sign up for our COVID-19 newsletter to stay up-to-date on the latest coronavirus news throughout New York In a stark reversal, President-Elect Donald Trump has agreed to pay $25 million to settle three lawsuits asserting longstanding fraud allegations against him and his now-defunct Trump University, according to an announcement from New York State Attorney General Eric Schneiderman late Friday afternoon.Schneiderman’s office sued Trump, Trump University and its former president, Michael Sexton, in 2013, accusing the billionaire of, among other schemes, scamming more than 6,000 victims out of more than $40 million through bogus courses that promised to teach his real estate investing techniques yet never delivered on its stated promises. Two federal class-action lawsuits filed in San Diego made similar claims. Collectively, the lawsuits created controversy for his presidential candidacy along the campaign trail and ultimately set the stage for the unprecedented predicament of a sitting U.S. president having to face multi-million dollar fraud charges in federal court.Trump had consistently refuted the merit of the cases and refused to settle, instead doubling down on verbal attacks against the federal judge overseeing the cases, sparking controversy by calling U.S. District Judge Gonzalo Curiel a “hater” at a campaign rally, and his “Mexican heritage” an “absolute conflict” of interest in an interview, due to Trump’s plan to build a wall between the United States and Mexico to keep illegal immigrants out.Friday’s announcement that the former star of The Apprentice reality TV show is agreeing to pay millions as a settlement, therefore, denotes a remarkable change of course. “In 2013, my office sued Donald Trump for swindling thousands of innocent Americans out of millions of dollars through a scheme known as Trump University,” Schneiderman said in a statement. “Donald Trump fought us every step of the way, filing baseless charges and fruitless appeals and refusing to settle for even modest amounts of compensation for the victims of his phony university. Today, that all changes. Today’s $25 million settlement agreement is a stunning reversal by Donald Trump and a major victory for the over 6,000 victims of his fraudulent university.“I am pleased that under the terms of this settlement, every victim will receive restitution and that Donald Trump will pay up to $1 million in penalties to the State of New York for violating state education laws,” he continued. “The victims of Trump University have waited years for today’s result and I am pleased that their patience—and persistence—will be rewarded by this $25 million settlement.”Between 2005 through 2011, not only did Trump University operate as an unlicensed educational institute, the attorney general’s office had charged, but its advertisements—many featuring Trump himself—made a slew of false claims, among these that the so-called school would use his “handpicked experts” to teach the get-rich real estate techniques, with some students shelling out up to $35,000 for programs that did no such things.In an August 2013 announcement outlining the filing of his suit against Trump, Schneiderman’s office said an investigation discovered that Trump “did not handpick even a single instructor at these seminars and had little or no role in developing any of the Trump University curricula, or seminar content.” It also revealed that “officials used the name ‘Trump University’ even though they lacked the charter necessary under New York law to call themselves a University. They were also unlicensed under New York State Education Law, evading an array of legal protections designed to protect New Yorkers from fraud.”At the time, Schneiderman, a Democrat, declared that Trump University’s thousands of victims across the country “got a hard lesson in bait-and-switch.”“Mr. Trump used his celebrity status and personally appeared in commercials making false promises to convince people to spend tens of thousands of dollars they couldn’t afford for lessons they never got,” he stated. “No one, no matter how rich or popular they are, has a right to scam hard working New Yorkers. Anyone who does should expect to be held accountable.”Besides, Schneiderman said, Trump University wasn’t even a real university, since it hadn’t received an actual license to operate in the state—duping students even more so, and reinforcing this misconception by use of a university-like seal on related materials and awarding diploma-like certificates of completion emblazoned with The Apprentice star’s autograph.Trump’s instructors made misrepresentations to get those attending free seminars to enroll in $1,495 three-day seminars, according to his office, and instead of receiving the stipulated instruction, those who signed up were given a list of lenders taken from a magazine—and those promised a personal visit from Trump instead got a photo with a life-sized picture of him.Rather than the promised services, instructors also used the three-day seminars to pitch $10,000 to $35,000 “Trump Elite mentorship programs,” the AG’s office stated, and were encouraged to contact their credit card companies during breaks to raise their credit limits to supposedly fund real estate deals. Instead, those higher credit limits were requested in order to pay for the “Elite” programs, said the office.“Many consumers who made the costly investments did not receive the individual mentor attention promised,” Schneiderman’s office stated in 2013. “After an initial three-day session, many mentors failed to return phone calls or emails and provided little to no follow-up assistance. Despite diligent efforts, many consumers were unable to conclude even a single real estate deal and were left worse off than they had been before enrolling in the Trump University programs. “Some consumers faced thousands of dollars of debt due to the expensive cost of the Elite Programs,” it continued. “Many felt they had been victims of an elaborate scam.”Trump University also violated federal consumer protection law, it added, by repeatedly failing to honor students’ requests to cancel.Trump, in June, clarified his comments regarding Judge Curiel, touted positive reviews of Trump University from students—viewable on a website as well, 98percentapproval.com—and vowed to continue to fight the lawsuits.“It is unfortunate that my comments have been misconstrued as a categorical attack against people of Mexican heritage,” he stated on his campaign website. “I am friends with and employ thousands of people of Mexican and Hispanic descent. The American justice system relies on fair and impartial judges. All judges should be held to that standard. I do not feel that one’s heritage makes them incapable of being impartial, but, based on the rulings that I have received in the Trump University civil case, I feel justified in questioning whether I am receiving a fair trial.”“While this lawsuit should have been dismissed, it is now scheduled for trial in November,” Trump continued. “I do not intend to comment on this matter any further. With all of the thousands of people who have given the courses such high marks and accolades, we will win this case!”President-Elect Trump does not admit any wrongdoing in agreeing to the settlement.
Harsh lockdowns aimed at halting the march of the coronavirus pandemic extended worldwide Monday as the death toll soared past 37,600 amid new waves of US outbreaks.Despite slivers of hope in stricken Italy and Spain, the tough measures that have confined some two-fifths of the globe’s population to their homes were broadened.Moscow and Lagos joined the roll call of cities around the globe with eerily empty streets, while Virginia and Maryland became the latest US states to announce emergency stay-at-home orders, followed quickly by the capital city Washington. ‘Nothing to eat’ Britain and Italy both warned recently that measures to prevent disease spread would be in place for months to come.In Britain, COVID-19 has hit high profile figures including Prime Minister Boris Johnson and Prince Charles, who was out of virus isolation, according to royal officials.In Israel, meanwhile, Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu became the latest world leader to enter isolation, while German Chancellor Angela Merkel’s third coronavirus test came back negative.The lockdowns are causing hardship across the world but particularly in impoverished cities in Africa and Asia.Africa’s biggest city, Lagos, joined the global stay-at-home from Monday, with Nigerian President Muhammadu Buhari ordering a two-week lockdown for its 20 million people. The measures also apply to the capital Abuja.”Two weeks is too long. I don’t know how we will cope,” said student Abdul Rahim, 25, as he helped his sister sell food from a market stall.Impoverished Zimbabwe also began enforcing a three-week lockdown.”They need to be fed, but there is nothing to eat,” vegetable vendor Irene Ruwisi said in the township of Mbare, pointing at her four grandchildren. “How do they expect us to survive?”The shutdown has already put millions out of work and forced governments to rush through huge stimulus plans.Experts in Germany, Europe’s economic powerhouse, said the virus would shrink output there this year by up to 5.4 percent.In the US, more than two thirds of the population were under lockdown orders.”We are nowhere near over the hump,” warned Louisiana Governor John Bel Edwards. “We still have an awful lot of work to do to flatten the curve.” “We’re sort of putting it all on the line,” Trump said, likening the efforts against coronavirus as a “war.”The number of confirmed COVID-19 cases around the world rose above 784,000, with 413,000 of those in Europe, while most of the confirmed deaths are also from the continent, according to an AFP tally.World leaders — several of whom have been stricken or forced into isolation — are still grappling for ways to deal with a crisis that will have economic and social shockwaves unseen since World War II.Trump and Russian President Vladimir Putin discussed “closer cooperation” and addressed plunging oil prices in a Monday call, the Kremlin said. ‘Good for morale’ The US Navy’s USNS Comfort, which has space for 1,000 beds and a dozen operating rooms, docked one day after Trump extended US social-distancing measures until the end of April. “It will be good for morale,” said New York Mayor Bill de Blasio of the arrival of the Comfort, which will help people requiring intensive care unrelated to coronavirus, easing the burden on hospitals.In Russia, Putin urged residents of Moscow to “very seriously” respect a lockdown that has closed all non-essential shops, including restaurants.Moscow’s famed Red Square was deserted, and surrounding streets were quiet.Anna, a 36-year-old web designer, said the lockdown would be hard for her and her five-year-old daughter. “But I don’t want Arina to get sick,” she told AFP on her way to buy bread. “So of course we will observe the quarantine.”Fears of spiking cases drove Moscow to follow Italy, Spain and France in imposing full lockdowns, and Europe remains the epicenter of the pandemic with the death toll there passing 26,500 on Monday, according to an AFP tally. Topics : ‘Work continues’ After weeks of life spent under a national lockdown in Italy, signs were emerging that drastic action could slow the outbreak’s spread.Even though the country’s death toll grew by 812 in 24 hours to 11,591, figures from the civil protection service showed the rate of new COVID-19 infections hitting a new low of just 4.1 percent and the number of people who had recovered reached a new high.”The data are better but our work continues,” said Giulio Gallera, the chief medical officer of Lombardy, Italy’s worst-hit region. Spain, which announced another 812 virus deaths in 24 hours, joined the United States and Italy in surpassing the number of cases in China, where the disease first emerged in December. France reported its highest daily number of deaths since the outbreak began, saying 418 more people had succumbed in hospital.Even as the US health system was stretched to the limit, Trump said he was ordering some excess medical equipment be sent to Italy, France and Spain. In a symbol of the scale of the challenge facing humanity, a US military medical ship sailed into New York to relieve the pressure on overwhelmed hospitals bracing for the peak of the pandemic.The US death toll passed 3,000, while the number of confirmed US infections topped 163,000, a global high.President Donald Trump sought to reassure Americans that authorities were ramping up distribution of desperately needed equipment like ventilators and personal protective gear.He also offered a stark warning, saying “challenging times are ahead for the next 30 days” as he acknowledged mulling a potential nationwide stay-at-home order.
“We need to set up more [flood shelter] tents to allow citizens to practice health protocols and physical distancing,” Anies added.Read also: Task force warns of potential COVID-19 clusters at flood sheltersSeparately, the Meteorology, Climatology and Geophysics Agency (BMKG) said on Wednesday that most of the archipelago would enter the rainy season in October. Several regions, including the capital and the western part of Java, are expected to experience extreme weather and heavy rainfall.The agency predicted that the country would experience the impact of La Niña until at least February 2021. Jakarta Governor Anies Baswedan has urged stakeholders to prepare for potentially hazardous flooding in the capital as the rainy season approaches. The season’s dangers are compounded this year by La Niña, a periodic weather phenomenon that tends to cause extreme weather in the Indonesian archipelago.“We need to be ready because we’re facing not just the flooding but also the COVID-19 outbreak. This condition requires special care,” the governor said during a ceremony to prepare for the rainy season in Jakarta on Wednesday morning.He said disaster mitigation efforts should adhere to strict health protocols to prevent the spread of COVID-19 during evacuations. La Niña is a meteorological phenomenon where surface water temperatures in the equatorial band of the Pacific Ocean become abnormally low. It is believed to occur every two to seven years and brings heavy rainfall to the Indonesian archipelago, which tends to trigger natural disasters such as floods and landslides.However, the BMKG said it was too early to conclude that all of this year’s extreme weather would be caused by La Niña. The agency said the impact of the phenomenon would differ in each region.Extreme rainfall triggered a flash flood in Sukabumi, West Java, on Sept. 21, killing three people. The villages of Cisaat, Pasawahan, Mekarsari and Bangbayang in the regency were heavily affected by the flooding. Nearly 1,000 people were forced to flee their homes.The torrential rain also caused floods of up to a meter in parts of Jakarta.Topics :
Poland’s voluntary second-pillar pension funds (OFEs) returned a weighted average 12-month return of -1.13% as of the end of September, according to the Polish Financial Supervision Authority (KNF), compared with -5.92% a year earlier and -6.63% this March.Unlike last March and September 2015, when all the 12 OFEs reported negative returns, five funds this time produced positive results, with Pocztylion, at 1.07%, generating the highest, and Generali, at -3.17%, the lowest.While the 12-month returns benefited from an upturn in the performance of the Warsaw Stock Exchange (WSE) since July, the three-year returns were less impressive, shrinking to an average 0.13% from 6.34% in March and 12.72% last year as a result of earlier losses.The OFE returns also compare poorly with increases in both the state pension paid by the first-pillar Polish Social Insurance Institution (ZUS) and the ZUS sub-accounts nominally holding assets earlier transferred from OFE accounts. The former, indexed to inflation and wage growth, rose by 5.3% last year, while the latter, based on positive average GDP growth, grew by 4.3%.As reported previously, since the 2014 reforms, the OFEs have become essentially equity funds dependent largely on the WSE’s performance.As of the end of September, Polish listed equities accounted for 75.3% of aggregate portfolios, followed some way behind by bank deposits (7.7%), foreign equities (6.9%) and domestic listed bonds (5.1%).Net assets fell by 1.7% year on year to PLN142.8bn (€33bn).The shrinkage was due not only to investment losses but the ‘slider’ mechanism, introduced in 2014, which incrementally transfers the savings of those with less than 10 years left to retirement to an individual’s ZUS sub-account.In the first nine months of 2016, the slider removed PLN2.6bn of assets, against the ZUS transfers of PLN2.2bn into the OFEs of the 15% or so of members still continuing to contribute to the second-pillar system.Membership declined by 0.7% to 16.46m.During the last four-month transfer window, which ended in July, some 88,000 workers chose start or restart contributing, against less than 67,000 who chose to stop.Any renewed interest in the OFEs, notably from new entrants to the labour market, was cut short in early July when Mateusz Morawiecki, development minister and deputy premier, announced an overhaul of the system that would transfer 75% of current second-pillar assets into private third-pillar accounts, and the remainder into the demographic reserve covering first-pillar shortfalls.This has yet to be presented as a draft bill to parliament but will have to be enacted by the end of the year in line with the current legislation’s three-yearly review of the country’s pension system.One potential obstacle is Poland’s Constitutional Tribunal, which earlier ruled that OFE assets are public, not private, monies.Morawiecki, whose earlier Responsible Development Plan is based partly on private capital financing, is likely to carry the rest of the government with him; in late September, following a government reshuffle, he additionally took over the position of finance minister.
Boston Globe 30 November 2014Few political debates in this country are as freighted with emotional, cultural, and ideological baggage as those that touch on the choices people make in forming families. When public discourse turns to decisions about wedlock and child-rearing — think of Daniel Patrick Moynihan’s 1965 report on “the breakdown of the Negro family,” or the uproar over Murphy Brown during the 1992 presidential race, or the modern push for same-sex marriage — civility is too often swept away amid a storm of hurt feelings and self-righteousness.All the more reason, then, to welcome two recent studies — one national in scope, one focused on Massachusetts — on the effects of single parenthood and the decline in marriage. Both lay out data with clarity, while avoiding moralizing or disapproval.One report, aptly titled “For Richer, For Poorer,” is by sociologist W. Bradford Wilcox of the American Enterprise Institute and economist Robert I. Lerman of the Urban Institute. It documents the profound links that connect family structure and financial well-being and underscores what decades of empirical data have shown: Families headed by married couples tend to be stronger economically than those headed by unwed single parents.“Anyone concerned about family inequality, men’s declining labor-force participation, and the vitality of the American dream should worry about the nation’s retreat from marriage,” the authors write. The steady fall in the percentage of married two-parent households — from 78 percent in 1980 to 66 percent in 2012 — goes a long way toward explaining why so many ordinary families have trouble climbing beyond the lower rungs on the economic ladder. Correlation isn’t proof of causation, of course. But there is no refuting the strong association between growing up with both parents in an intact family and achieving higher levels of education, work, and income as young adults.Wilcox and Lerman put dollar amounts to the “intact-family premium” reaped by those who are raised by their own biological or adoptive parents. By age 28 to 30, for example, men from such backgrounds are earning on average $6,500 more per year in personal income than their peers from single-parent homes. And since growing up with both parents increases one’s likelihood of marrying as an adult, men and women who were raised by married parents tend to enjoy much higher family incomes as well — in the case of that 28- to 30-year-old male, more than $16,000 higher, on average.http://www.bostonglobe.com/opinion/2014/11/30/two-parent-families-have-decreased-economic-inequality-has-grown/1CyqxfjZ4mUVBbWsuZ01zI/story.html?event=event25
Tweet Share LocalNews Discover Dominica Authority & Solid Waste Management Corporation launch first bin painting competition. by: – May 5, 2011 18 Views no discussions Share Share Sharing is caring! Tourism Awareness Month launching ceremony, Hon. Ian Douglas in the centre and Mr. Colin Piper sitting on his left.As part of activities to mark Tourism Awareness Month observed in May, the Discover Dominica Authority along with the Dominica Solid Waste Management Corporation have launched the first ever Bin Painting competition for Primary School Students.The competition is open to students between the ages of 9 to 12 and targets students from primary schools in the Roseau District.Among other reasons, the contest aims at promoting environmental conservation among primary school students.Director of Discover Dominica Authority Colin Piper says the students will be required to design the bins depicting the proper disposal of paper waste.So far a number of primary schools have confirmed their participation.Dominica Vibes News
MANILA – Court of Appeals (CA) Justice Priscilla Baltazar-Padilla has been appointed by President Rodrigo Duterte as the new Associate Justice of the Supreme Court (SC), Malacañang announced on Thursday night. Baltazar-Padilla was the ninth appointee of President Duterte to the high court giving him a clear majority on pending crucial cases involving the administration./PN Baltazar-Padilla is set to fill in the seat vacated by former Associate Justice Andres Reyes, who retired on May 11, according to Presidential Spokesperson Harry Roque. Baltazar-Padilla, a first-time applicant, bested other nominees, namely, Court Administrator Jose Midas P. Marquez and her fellow CA justices Ricardo Rosario, Japar Dimaampao, Jhosep Lopez, Ramon Cruz, and Manuel Barrios. She added that a joint resolution by Congress is not the proper remedy in the case of shuttered broadcast network ABS-CBN Corp. because “what is required is a law and not a mere resolution.” In the Judicial and Bar Council’s (JBC) first online public panel interview, Baltazar-Padilla said Congress cannot be compelled to grant a franchise to any entity “because franchise is a mere privilege” and “cannot be demanded as a matter of right.”