text:
To download this product, you'll need Garmin Express.
The dēzl 560LT is designed with truckers in mind. It has a large 5" display, an extra loud speaker, and external video input for backup cameras. Features include trucking speed limits, truck-specific route highlighting and trucking points of interest (POIs). It's also geared toward RV drivers, who will appreciate the ability to setup an RV profile and calculate routes based on height, weight and length restrictions.
With your dēzl 560LT, logging and retaining trip information has never been easier. You record fuel usage, and the 560LT automatically records state mileage for IFTA fuel logging. Easily log your hours of service and driving status, and the 560LMT tracks your hours and automatically warns you of HOS violations. Conveniently export all logs for improved reporting and tracking of each trip.
With a 5" (12.7 cm) high-resolution touchscreen display, dēzl 560LT provides a wealth of information in great detail. Clearly follow your highlighted, truck-specific route on the trucking map (U.S. and Canada) and view trucking violations and warnings. dēzl 560LT also comes standard with lane assist with junction view, which provides photo-realistic views of upcoming junctions to guide you to the right lane at the right time — especially helpful when navigating complex highway interchanges.
dēzl 560LT has truck-specific points of interest to let you search roadway exits for truck stops, food, lodging, rest areas and weigh stations. Truck stop information includes a list of services offered, such as WiFi, showers and truck scales.
A combination power cable/traffic receiver in the box gives you traffic services for the life¹ of your device. You'll avoid traffic jams and keep moving when your dēzl 560LT alerts you and offers detours. No additional purchases are necessary — it's 100% subscription-free traffic.
dēzl 560LT includes nüRoute technology with trafficTrends historical traffic and myTrends predictive routing. With trafficTrends, your dēzl 560LT automatically learns daytime trends for traffic flow to improve your routes and better predict your estimated time of arrival based on time of day and day of week. With myTrends, when you save your regular destinations in your "Favorites," your dēzl 560LT will, over time, begin to figure out where you're going even without your telling it! It provides time of arrival and relevant traffic information. So whether you're driving to and from work or a regularly scheduled weekly event, your dēzl 560LT will help you get there on time. No subscription or additional cost required.
With detailed maps providing turn-by-turn directions that speak street names, dēzl 560LT provides specialized routing to support truck-related restrictions in both the U.S. and Canada (customizable by height, weight, length, width and hazardous materials). Simply enter dimensions and load restrictions, and dēzl 560LT guides you according to your requirements. The onboard Trip Planner lets you create multiple-stop routes and plan and save future trips. And with HotFix® satellite prediction, dēzl 560LT calculates your position faster to get you there quicker.
dēzl 560LT keeps you informed of upcoming road conditions, such as sharp curves and high winds, and restrictions, including no trailer or hazardous materials. A grade data field that appears on the map enables drivers to anticipate descents and ascents and shift accordingly. Trucking speed limits appear if they are lower than the posted automotive speed limit, and you have the ability to correct the speed limit on your dēzl 560LT so you have the most accurate data at all times.
For hands-free calling, dēzl 560LT integrates Bluetooth® wireless technology with a built-in microphone and speaker. Just pair it with your compatible Bluetooth phone and talk hands-free through the 560LT while staying focused on the road. Simply dial numbers with dēzl's touchscreen keypad to make a call. To answer calls, just tap the screen and speak into its built-in microphone. Enjoy convenient 1-touch dialing for contacts and points of interest.
¹FREE lifetime traffic updates may not be transferred to another person or another Garmin product. Lifetime traffic extends for the useful life of your Garmin traffic receiver (as long as you own a
compatible Garmin GPS) or as long as Garmin receives traffic data from its traffic supplier, whichever is shorter. A traffic receiver's "useful life" means the period during which the receiver (a) has the required technical capabilities to utilize current traffic data service and (b) is capable of operating as intended without major repairs. Traffic content not available for all areas. See traffic coverage areas and
Program License Agreement for complete terms and conditions.
This USB mass storage device is compatible with Windows® XP or newer and Mac® OS X 10.4 or later.
¹Lifetime Maps Terms & Conditions
²Lifetime Traffic Terms & Conditions
Need maps for other regions? See all maps that are compatible with this device.
Update the maps that came with your device for the best navigation experience.
Carry Case
Add to your dēzl™ Camper
Travel Pack
Site Map •
Terms of Use •
Statement of Privacy •
Copyright © 1996-2016 Garmin Ltd. or its subsidiaries


text:
The video above is an illustration of the central argument contained in Naomi Klein's book, "The Shock Doctrine", in which she asserts that governments exploit the state of shock suffered by populations after traumatic disasters, to force through measures that would be unpalatable or strongly resisted in calmer times.
Now, eighteen months after publication, The Shock Doctrine has picked up a £50,000 prize from The University of Warwick.
The Warwick website that celebrates Klein's win would profit from the attention of a good literary sub-editor who could rephrase the ungainly tautology on the front page: "Innovative new prize", which should surely be better expressed on a site that celebrates good writing.
Nice motion graphics in the vid, though… (link to Flash site of foreignoffice.com)

subset: commoncrawl


text:
5 Recipes to Try This Navratri
Sabudana Khichdi
Image Credit: Vegbowl
Ingredients: Sabudana (sago), peanuts, green chillies, potato, ghee, cumin seeds, salt, lemon juice, coriander leaves, curry leaves
-Soak sabudana for 3-4 hours.
-Peel the peanuts and roast it on a hot tawa. Grind the peanuts.
-Chop the chillies, coriander and boil the potatoes.
-Take a pan, add ghee to it. Put curry leaves, cumin seeds and chopped green chillies. Keep stirring.
-Add chopped potatoes. Keep stirring for 3 minutes.
-Add sabudana and peanuts.
-Add salt and lemon juice. Mix it well.
-After removing from the heat, garnish it with coriander leaves. Serve hot.


text:
Enter your Email address:
Wolters Kluwer Health may email you for journal alerts and information, but is committed
to maintaining your privacy and will not share your personal information without
your express consent. For more information, please refer to our Privacy Policy.
Roach, Janey A.; George, Charles J.; John, Lawrence; Plocki, Regina
PURPOSE: This exploratory, retrospective study aimed at examining whether patients experience orthostatic hypotension unnecessarily when antihypertensive medication(s) is simultaneously resumed following total joint replacement surgery.
SAMPLE: The study sample consisted of 285 patients who underwent either total knee or total hip surgery and had a dual medical diagnosis of hypertension requiring treatment with more than 1 type of antihypertensive medication.
METHOD: Medical record reviews of all patients admitted to the orthopaedic unit from March 1, 2006, through June 30, 2006, at University of Pittsburgh Medical Center were analyzed to determine whether patients experienced any hypotensive event within 48 hr of their total joint replacement surgery following the resumption of their antihypertensive medications.
RESULTS: Thirty-five percent of the patients experienced a hypotensive event following the resumption of their antihypertensive medications within the identified time frame. Among patients who had documented evidence of a hypotensive episode prior to the resumption of their antihypertensive medication, 42% of those experienced hypotension after postoperative medication administration versus 28% in patients without prior hypotensive episodes (p = .50).
CONCLUSIONS: These findings indicated the need for clear nursing guidelines outlining time frames for the assessment and documentation of blood pressure reading prior to antihypertensive medication administration.
© 2009 National Association of Orthopaedic Nurses
Colleague's E-mail is Invalid
Your Name: (optional)
Your Email:
Colleague's Email:
Separate multiple e-mails with a (;).
Thought you might appreciate this item(s) I saw at Orthopaedic Nursing.
Send a copy to your email
Your message has been successfully sent to your colleague.
Some error has occurred while processing your request. Please try after some time.
An Existing Folder
A New Folder
Folder Name:
The item(s) has been successfully added to "".
Login with your LWW Journals username and password.
Username or Email:
Forgot Password?
Enter and submit the email address you registered with. An email with instructions to reset your password will be sent to that address.
Link to reset your password has been sent to specified email address.
What does "Remember me" mean?
By checking this box, you'll stay logged in until you logout. You'll get easier access to your articles, collections,
media, and all your other content, even if you close your browser or shut down your
To protect your most sensitive data and activities (like changing your password),
we'll ask you to re-enter your password when you access these services.
What if I'm on a computer that I share with others?
If you're using a public computer or you share this computer with others, we recommend
that you uncheck the "Remember me" box.
Save my selection
Article Level Metrics


text:
From: Chef Andrew Newberg, Sbrocco, Des Moines, IA. Yield: 2 servings. Carrot-Beer Emulsion: 2 carrots, peeled, chopped into 1⁄2" pieces 1 can light beer 1 tsp. coriander to taste, salt and pepper to cover, water 3 Tbsp. butter Barley: remaining liquid from above mixture to taste, salt ½ cup barley 1 Tbsp. whole coriander 1 tsp. soybean oil 2 Tbsp. Italian parsley, chopped Brussels Sprouts: 4 brussels sprouts, trimmed, halved or quartered, ...
Register to view this article
WhyRegisterfor FREE?
Registering for Premium Content on Restaurant Hospitality will give youINSTANTaccess to invaluable articles and media content that industry professionals rely on. You will have access to our special reports, feature articles, and industry analysis. It'sFREE, easy and quick.


text:
William 'Bill' Jonathan Balsley
William "Bill" Jonathan Balsley, 66, of Franklin, Tenn., died (Jan. 10, 2013). Born Oct. 26, 1946, in Uniontown, Pa. Graduate of Parkersburg High School and West Virginia University (Go Mountaineers!). Previous owner and director of the TV series "Fishing University" and owner and director of Thirtys Film Productions.
Survived by parents, Albert and Suzanne Daniel Balsley of Williamstown; wife, Janis A. Balsley of Franklin, Tenn.; son, Jon Ryan Balsley of Kansas City, Mo.; daughter, Karin Kathleen Balsley of Nashville, Tenn.; sister, Gretchen Sue (Shean) McManus of Tampa, Fla.; stepchildren, Seth (Jamie) Grimenstein of Nashville, Tenn., and Erin (Marty) Rowland of Murfreesboro, Tenn.; grandchildren, Ella-Rose Rowland (his bowl of sugar) and Callie Mae Grimenstein; sister in-law, Toni L. Stuart; brother in-law, William "Bill" Stuart Sr. of Moberly, Mo.
Memorial services will be conducted at 5 p.m. Saturday (Jan. 12, 2013) at Williamson Memorial Funeral Home with Father Bill Midgett officiating. In lieu of flowers memorials may be made to Alive Hospice, 1718 Patterson St., Nashville, Tenn., 37203. Visitation will be one hour prior to the service at Williamson Memorial Funeral Home, (615) 794-2289. www.williamsonmemorial.com


text:
The 4-H club members throughout the state come together to compete in the 2012 Greater Jacksonville Agricultural Fair's Horse Show Saturday, October 20 at 9 a.m. in the Jacksonville Equestrian Center, 13611C Normandy Boulevard and is free to the public.
The show is open to all young equestrians ages 8 -18 in from Duval, Clay, Nassau and St. Johns counties. Contestant does not have to be an active member in the 4-H, however the show will be judged by Official Rules of the Florida 4-H Area and State Horse Shows. Equestrians may enter seven different classes of their choice such as Grooming and Conditioning, Showmanship, Horsemanship, Riding, Trail and more. Six individual placings, first through sixth, are awarded for each class.
The Horse Show is a free family friendly event which encourages interaction with local horse owners.
For official rules, stalling dates and times please visit the Premium Book section of the Jacksonville Fair Web site at www.jacksonvillefair.com.
Copyright © 2016 Renda Broadcasting. All Rights Reserved.


text:
The Florida Gators move to 6-0 (5-0) on the season and are bowl eligible. It took Florida five less games this season than in 2011 to become bowl eligible, and their five conference wins are already two more than a season ago.
The win wasn't pretty, and there are still some things the Gators need to work on, but a conference win feels good no matter how it comes.
Let's take a look at five things we learned from the Gators' 31-17 win vs. Vanderbilt.


text:
Interest rate hike more likely after strong economic data.
Utilities, phone companies fall most today.
The Dow Jones industrial average fell 54.30 points, or 0.3 percent, to 18,253.85.
Market bounces back from a steep loss Thursday
Investors worry about health of Deutsche Bank.
Organization agrees to limit crude output.
The market opened lower after two days of losses but quickly recovered.
Health of banks, particularly in Europe, causes concerns.
Technology stocks were trading heavily, particularly Facebook, Yahoo, and Twitter.
Newly created real estate sector thrives in S&P 500.


text:
CLOVIS -- Fabian Martinez, 20, pleaded no contest to 15 felonies, including numerous auto burglaries, and was sentenced to serve the next 10 years in prison.
In a crime spree from August to September, 2013, Fabian Martinez burglarized multiple vehicles in and around Clovis, breaking out the windows to get to inside.
Martinez used a stolen ATM card from one of the vehicles, which led officers to apprehend and arrest him on September 19, 2013.
Upon release, Martinez will be placed on intensive supervised probation for a period of five years and was ordered to make full restitution for each of the crimes.
Copyright 2016 Nexstar Broadcasting, Inc. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.


text:
|By Avidreader2006 (Avidreader2006) on Thursday, July 22, 2004 - 11:23 am: Edit
Hey, everyone! I was wondering what everyone here thought of the US minimum wage. State whether you think the minimum wage should be kept the same, lowered, increased or no minimum wage is neccessary and then explain why you feel that way on the issue of minimum wage. Also state what you think the minimum wage should be in an exact amount e.g. $7.25.
I personally think that the minimum wage should be raised to $7.00 per hour. The minimum wage has not increased since 1997 and $5.15 per hour can't get you much today, even when shopping at Walmart. Some corporations that can afford to give everyone WAY ABOVE the current minimum wage of $5.15 ,e.g. McDonald's, sometimes give their employees near the minimum wage (I got $5.30 per hour at McDonald's). Its also been shown that increasing the minimum wage stimulates buisiness(sp?) for the fast food industry and other places of work where minimum wage is usually paid.
|By Hunter1985 (Hunter1985) on Thursday, July 22, 2004 - 12:01 pm: Edit
I believe the minimum wage should stay the same, maybe go up every couple years (or every year) to reflect inflation- although not a drastic increase- but inflation should be taken into account.
The reason I'm against a specific and drastic increase is because while big corporations like the ones you mentioned can often afford to pay more, often times it hurts small businesses. It does have a negative effect on the business owners when it is forced. Also, and I do know from experience, small business owners give pay raises on their own based on experience. They do not keep a person on min. wage forever, and I feel it should stay in the hands of the business owners. For those who need the wage to live on, if they're working full time, they will naturally get a larger and larger wage as they continue to work (they won't be on min. wage long). I know that small business owners treat their employees very well and do not need a forced minimum wage.
|By Smhop (Smhop) on Thursday, July 22, 2004 - 12:12 pm: Edit
Oh yes, raise it. $5.15 is a piddling sum. Some states do have a higher min wage, btw.
I just read the other day, that if worker salaries had increased with *the same percentage as CEO salaries* in recent decades.... that the avg blue collar worker would earn 101k and minimum wage would be $21.
I found that very interesting-- it was an article on tne ineqlality of wealth distribution in the US--
|By Born2run16517 (Born2run16517) on Thursday, July 22, 2004 - 12:24 pm: Edit
hmm this is an interesting question and the answer all depends on what you want to do. Anybody who has passed a Economics 101 class can show that raising the minimum wage will increase unemployment. While many people think raising minimum wage will help the little man the contray is true. If you raise minimum wage those that have jobs and are successful at them will benefit while those that are unemployed will have an even more difficult job of finding a place of employment. Economists agree that 5% unemployment is a good place to be at as we are now, so I would leave minimum wage where it is. Now those well-versed in economics may see unemployment is much more than just minimum wage which is true though minimum wage does play a signifcant role, but I figure if it isn't broken why try and fix it.
|By Ariesathena (Ariesathena) on Thursday, July 22, 2004 - 12:42 pm: Edit
Minimum wage should, and does, vary by state. $7/hour is close to MA's state minimum, and for good reason. However, the same sum in a state like Tennessee or Mississippi might not be that far off from what a recent college grad would make.
|By Ejpowers87 (Ejpowers87) on Thursday, July 22, 2004 - 12:53 pm: Edit
Heres why you can't just raise the minimum wage. If you raise the min wage, then all companies will have to raise prices of their goods to pay wages. Then, all companies that use the products of that company will have to pay more, and then raise the price of THEIR products. This will just raise the price of everything in the market, and pretty soon that $7 an hour will be just like the $5.15 is today.
Also, if we get rid of the minimum wage, it's not like everyone is going to me making $.50 an hour, because no one would take those jobs. If you allow the market to regulate prices, you can lower unemployment (by some people taking jobs that pay under 5.15)
And finally, the reason you abolish the minimum wage is that the government should not have the right to regulate what a private company can pay an individual.
|By Ejpowers87 (Ejpowers87) on Thursday, July 22, 2004 - 12:55 pm: Edit
Also, if anyone thinks that this wil just lead to more exploitation of illegal immigrants, I have a solution. BORDER CONTROL.
|By Tdizzo (Tdizzo) on Thursday, July 22, 2004 - 01:05 pm: Edit
hmmn...not nessecarily border control, but stricter regulation of companies hiring illiegals. I live in California where the minimum wage is $6.25 (granted teh cost of living is atrociously high as well), this is not enough o live on. The minimum wage has produced the phenomena of the "working poor" people who have jobs but are paid so little they are unable to raise themselves above the poverty line. I certainly agree that there should be some form of "livable wage" law (something the San Francisco/Bay Area is considering) but the economic consequences of this would be catastrophic. So what solution exists? We can turn to philosophy for ansers, but that generally just leads to more questions. I have my own problems with redistributive programs, so I'm unwilling to go for the old "just tax the rich till they ain't riuch anymore" scheme. However, the minimum wage of old needs to be adjusted to acknoledge the higher cost of living many working poor face these days.
|By Tdizzo (Tdizzo) on Thursday, July 22, 2004 - 01:07 pm: Edit
Also...I see nothing wrong with paying working minors diddly squat (so long as they do not face excessive financial burdens, i.e. helping support their family, paying their own way, etc...) so long as you are a dependant on your parents tax form, you can make minimum wage without crying as you bring absolutely nothing to the table beyond a set of hands.
|By Ejpowers87 (Ejpowers87) on Thursday, July 22, 2004 - 01:16 pm: Edit
Stricter regulation of companies hiring illegals? First of all, the first thing that the illegal immigrants do when they enter the country is break federal law. We should allow them to stay and take jobs that many Americans would take? Regular immigration is fine, but illegals have no right being here. Also, illegal immigration is a security issue. If I were a terrorist and wanted to get into America, I would use our Mexican border before I ever flew over here.
|By Smhop (Smhop) on Thursday, July 22, 2004 - 01:31 pm: Edit
When the CEO earns 55 million and the teenagers he employs earn 5 bucks and hour... how is this not corporate slavery? How is this not serfdom?
Residtributing corportate wealth would be better for our eccon--- reagan's trickle down ecconomics don't work.
|By Ariesathena (Ariesathena) on Thursday, July 22, 2004 - 01:42 pm: Edit
That is true, SmHop - as someone said, you can't use market forces to justify giving CEOs $50 million - because someone equally as qualified will happily do the job for $10 million.
I'm not sure that the remaining $40 million (hypothetical, of course) should go immediately to the lowest-wage workers; some form of equitable distribution along the pay scale would be good. Give middle managment a small raise and a better 401K. Improve benefits. Give longer maternity leave.
I am all for having a minimum wage. People will work for less - ask any immigrant. They might happily work for $2/hour here, pack into an apartment, and feel like their kids have more opportunities than they would in their native country. Also, when the economy is bad, there at least is some floor to the wages. An employer can't turn around and say, "You're lucky to have this job, so I'll pay you $3/hour. If you don't like it, get $0/hour when you're unemployed." The gov't min. wage is, IMO, fairly reasonable.
I always question kids who say that the minimum wage should be raised. If it goes up, it does not mean that the salaries of other fields will increase. While you might think it's great now that everyone should earn at least $10/hour for their work, you'll think differently when you realize that your first job requires a bachelor's degree, prior work experience, references, and pays $12/hour. You'll wonder why you're getting paid that when the cashier at the local pharmacy earns 80% of what you do and is 16 years old. (My friend worked at the Gap while job-searching; graduated magna cum laude from a top university, and barely earns more now than she did in retail.)
There is a balance somewhere, and I don't think it's in raising minimum wage too quickly.
|By Jlq3d3 (Jlq3d3) on Thursday, July 22, 2004 - 01:51 pm: Edit
Min wage is a horrible idea for everyone, and it should be eliminated.
As an issue of fairness, whose business is it to tell a human being what he can pay a consenting person, and whose business is it for the gov to tell a person what they can agree to work for. It should be between the employer and consenting employee. It is none of government's business.
For the employer, it makes things more expensive to pay people an artificially high amount when they are doing a job that is worth less. It makes it harder to be profitable and harder to hire more artificially high wage earners, which leads to my next point.
It is worst for the low-skilled workers. Economists agree that for every dollar the minimum wage is raised, hundreds of thousands of workers lose their jobs, because employers are unable to hire as many workers. If a person is capable of doing a job worth 5$ an hour, he would be sqeezed out of the job market because he isnt allowed to take that job.
And for the average consumer, it makes products and services more expensive because of the high unfair cost of labor. Minimum wage also makes outsourcing more popular, because why would a company want to do business in a place with so many government intrusions.
|By Ariesathena (Ariesathena) on Thursday, July 22, 2004 - 01:59 pm: Edit
Is the person consenting? If that person needs a job (to eat, to pay for heat, to not be homeless), they are not free to reject all job offers. I can go shopping for fajita pans. If I don't like the prices of them, I don't have to get any fajita pans. The same is obviously not true for jobs.
How can a single person negotiate a fair price for their labour when faced with a large, influential company? Have you studied the eras of blacklisting and unionization? Read The Grapes of Wrath?
Would you work for $2/hour? 50 cents an hour? Should we eliminate minimum wage, you might be forced to do this.
|By Ejpowers87 (Ejpowers87) on Thursday, July 22, 2004 - 02:10 pm: Edit
WOW. I didn't know we had so many Communist Pinko's on this message board. I'll pick apart the arguments 1 by 1.
smHop- How can you say that Reagan's trickle down economy didn't work? It lowered unemployment (a ton), lowered inflation (a ton), and got the nation out of the worst depression since the Great depression.
Second of all, what right does the government have in regulating what a CEO, or a burger flipper, can make? Also, let's look at what redistribution of wealth really is:
Let's say I work hard and become a CEO of a company. I make tons of money. Why should someone be able to take that money away from me? What right does someone else have to my money? It is a communist principle that should be regarded as such.
Ariesathena- Look, no one would take a $.50 job. If anyone did, not many other people would. To get more people to take jobs a company would have to pay more. But secondly, and MORE IMPORTANTLY, if a company paid its workers less, they could lower their prices. Then, companies that used this companies products would lower their prices, and soon that $4 an hour would be worth just as much as $5.15 an hour. The market will readjust to these market forces.
Also, keeping a minimum wage causes unemployment. Is it better to have more people make $4 an hour, or more people to make $0 an hour?
|By Jlq3d3 (Jlq3d3) on Thursday, July 22, 2004 - 02:16 pm: Edit
Yes, there are millions of jobs, and employers try to get the best people for lowest price, so people of all skill levels have some choice as to jobs. If a company paid only 50 cents/hr for a job as a clerk, they would be out of business because other companies would pay more than that and they would not be able to hire. Why do you think there are jobs that pay 10$ an hour without min wage? because they need to.
Santa Monica, a city which is very socialistic, has some of the highest minimum wages in the nation, 10.65 an hour plus benifits. Even though Santa Monica is in a prime economic location on the beach in LA, it has enormous unemployment, high homelessness, and a load of disincentives to create new business and jobs. It just does not work for the government to artificially control how much one makes. There are serious consequences.
|By Bunmushroom (Bunmushroom) on Thursday, July 22, 2004 - 02:22 pm: Edit
All theoretical evidence by economists say min. wage is a bad idea, as well as all practical evidence such as Jlg3d3's point about Santa Monica illustrates the stupidity of artificially regulating people's pay. It sounds good to say "pay people more", but even the littlest thinking reveals how shallow and damaging that would be to everyone and the economy.
A recent editorial in "Investors Business Daily" put it this way:
"Minimum wage laws, an icon of the political left, are particularly damaging to low-income workers. Many are locked out of jobs. The Employment Policies Institute figures that the first 50 cents out of the $1.00 hike in the minimum wage in 1996 through 1997 cost 645,000 jobs. Rarely do economists agree on any given issue. But here, however, almost all economists agree: Minimum wage hikes destroy jobs. And they hurt the very people that the victicrats purport to help�women, minorities, and teens. Most minimum wage workers are not heads of households, attempting to raise a family on $5.75 an hour.
But, suppose that the typical minimum wage earner were a married man with a two-child family. Can we agree that one should defer producing a child until one can feed, clothe, and educate that child? Shouldn�t a minimum wage person have a minimum family, at least until skills, and therefore, future prospects, improve?
A recent "Investors Business Daily" article explained how minimum wage hikes kill jobs, "It�s clear to everyone but the most diehard socialists how this happens. Employers who can afford to pay four workers $5.00 an hour can�t afford them all at $6.00 an hour. Somebody has to go. So, three are marginally helped�a fourth is simply without a job. And the fifth, sixth, and seventh don�t get hired in the first place." "
|By Ariesathena (Ariesathena) on Thursday, July 22, 2004 - 02:40 pm: Edit
There's a radical difference between paying someone $5/hour and $10/hour. If you've read my previous posts, you'll understand that I'm not in favour of a radical increase in minimum wage.
Rampant deflation, by the way, is not a good thing. Ask anyone with debt (Student loan, mortgage, credit card), and you'll understand. I would hate to try to pay back my loans (which will be $120,000) during a time of deflation, effectively making my loans worth a quarter million in today's dollars. Low inflation (a percentage a year) or so is quite good for the economy. Deflation will result in people defaulting on their loans (never a good thing); huge inflation obviously not good either.
The question remains: what if all companies decided to only pay new workers $2/hour? Would you work for less than minimum wage? Both of you criticized me, but neither one of you affirmatively answered that you would work for less than minimum wage. Wonder why...
|By Chavi (Chavi) on Thursday, July 22, 2004 - 02:41 pm: Edit
Seems to me its harder for teenagers to find summer and part-time jobs these days. If you raise the minimum wage, it'll be virtually impossible.
|By Smhop (Smhop) on Thursday, July 22, 2004 - 02:42 pm: Edit
AriesAthena: I agree with everything you said... yes, the money should be redistributed across the board, including perhaps dividends to stockholders... certainly employee benefit increases (retirement etc), maternity et al. I read that the people of France get 4 years paid vacation... Americans work SO hard for what we get.
Your points about a fed minimum are well founded-- history has shown there has to be some sort of stop-gap... we can't wel expect ppl to work for $1.50 a day, can we? Yet, it happens in the third world nations such as India. The rich there are very, very Rich, and the poor are sickly poor...
EIpowers77: you're not really thinking this through... "if the wages was 50cents, no one would take that job".... uh, okay, given a choice between 50 cents and nothing, people take the 50cents. My great grandmother sold apples during the great depression bc there was NO job, no *nothing* for her... you do what you have to do in this life. Fortunately, we have a government that keeps the corportate wolves at bay, without mandating too much control over capatalist enterprise.
As for your take on Regan, you're spouting re-written history, proppganda. Americans lost more buying power in the 80s than ever in this nation's history-- it began the current cycle of dept ridden lifestyle-- for the first time in US history, the working class wages did not even keep pace with inflation, yet the wealth at the top grew by like 400%.
By the way, I am a die-hard fiscal conservative- not a pinko. Yet, somehow, I manage to have a little heart too...
|By Smhop (Smhop) on Thursday, July 22, 2004 - 02:45 pm: Edit
Its harder for kids to find summer jobs bc a)the CEO is taking too big a cut. b)bread-winners need those jobs as thier jobs get outsourced c)so many families HAVE to have two incomes just to get by today that moms are out working those jobs.
Our econ is in a lot worse position than people are willing to admit.
|By Smhop (Smhop) on Thursday, July 22, 2004 - 02:45 pm: Edit
sorry, dbl post
|By Ejpowers87 (Ejpowers87) on Thursday, July 22, 2004 - 03:02 pm: Edit
Let's see, had Jimmy Carter been president for another 4 years, no doubt the huge stagflation would have continued. Reagan made the economy BETTER than it was, he IMPROVED it. Did he make it perfect? No. Were there still major problems with it? Absolutely. But he improved it more than any other president ever has.
Also, about the trickle-down economy, the poor don't make the economy run. Someone who makes very little will end up buying what he needs. Someone who makes a lot of money will buy what he needs, what he wants, and will invest. Investment helps new companies start out, therefore helping employ more people.
Also, smhop, what are you talking about it's tough to find a summer job? I found mine in a week and work about 2 mins from my house. I have never had a problem finding a job, you are basing your arguments on false assumptions.
Smhop, you are also comparing our current economy to the Great Depression. You can't talk about economics and compare the two. Of course people in the Great Depression took $.50 jobs, thate because there was NOTHING else. Nowadays there are so many choices in jobs.
Arth- first of all, the government has no right to redistribute wealth. You make money in spite of government, not because of it. And I would take a job under min wage because I am not supporting anyone.
But seriously, lets look at the from an Adam Smith perspective. When someone makes so little money, it is irresponsible to have a wife and 5 kids. If you can't support them, you should not be having them. $5.15 an hour is enough to get by on by yourself, and maybe a wife. You can't bring EVERYONE out of poverty. As Jesus said, there will always be poor people.
|By Princess_Banana (Princess_Banana) on Thursday, July 22, 2004 - 03:03 pm: Edit
I thought it was $6.75 in CA
|By Ejpowers87 (Ejpowers87) on Thursday, July 22, 2004 - 03:06 pm: Edit
Also, you can call yourself a fiscal conservative all day (Howard Dean and GWB say they are, so that term has little weight nowadays), but when you support income redistribution, you are supporting a communist principle. It's that simple.
|By Ariesathena (Ariesathena) on Thursday, July 22, 2004 - 03:13 pm: Edit
What's to say that a company which starts paying it's workers $4/hour instead of $5/hour will then cut the cost of its goods? We can see very well from exhorbitant CEO salaries (which have increased about two orders of magnitude, on the average, in the past decade) that the increased wealth to the company does not go towards decreasing cost or increasing benefits, but rather towards management or CEO compensation.
The Great Depression analogy is completely fine. Even in the past year, people took pay cuts to stay employed, worked longer hours, took on more duties, skipped vacation - why? If they didn't do it, someone else would. Same theory goes for wages. Now, I'm not a pinko; I'm not even in favour of raising min. wage. I laughed at the lunatics at my alma mater who staged a huge protest so that janitors could get paid $12/hour. (I think that, upon graduation and seeing what types of jobs they can get, they'll probably want a $12/hour job!) But I don't think that eliminating minimum wage will do a damn thing save to wreck havoc on the economy. CEO and management compenstation will skyrocket (even more); people who have trouble making ends meet on two jobs will be in larger trouble.
If you can't support them, you should not be having them. Agreed. But it still happens... so are you supposed to help create a situation where a kid can't eat because Mom can't afford formula on $2/hour? $5/hour? Isn't it better to have a minimum wage which is at least decent (not phenomenal) and allow Mom to try to earn enough money to get the family going instead of relying heavily on WIC? You are going to have to help people who have families accidentally and too young somehow, whether it be through minimum wage, subsidized childcare, WIC, or a huge socialist system in which the state takes care of them because the mother can't earn enough.
Arguing for minimum wage is not a pinko position - actually, it's damn moderate. Arguing for its elimination is heartless, ignorant, or radically conservative. Take your pick.
|By Ariesathena (Ariesathena) on Thursday, July 22, 2004 - 03:17 pm: Edit
Someone please explain how minimum wage (in which workers help the company earn money and thus earn money themselves) is income redistribution. It's only IR if we assume that CEOs should have all of the money, and dole it out based on their needs alone.
Have you ever worked both a low-wage, low-skill job (i.e. restaurant work) and a high-wage, high-skill job? As someone who has done both, I understand what my time is worth as a human and as a professional. While there is a five-fold difference in what I earned scooping ice cream and what I make as an engineer, I understand that both have worth. I think that my time, as a human, doing a low-wage job, is still worth something - and I'm happy that the government set a standard as to what my time is worth. I guess I learned that $5/hour really is not that much money. My guess is that the adults argue for min. wage (even though adults tend to be more conservative), while the kids argue against it.
By the way, no one has yet to stand up and say that they would work for $2/hour.
|By Ejpowers87 (Ejpowers87) on Thursday, July 22, 2004 - 03:18 pm: Edit
I just don't understand why everyone hates how CEOs make tons of money. Let's see, they do one of the most difficult jobs on Earth, and have tremendous pressure on them to produce results. These aren't people who tricked, lied, and cheated their way to the top, they worked very hard for what they have, and continue to work very hard for it. Why should these people have their money taken away just because they have more?
|By Smhop (Smhop) on Thursday, July 22, 2004 - 03:22 pm: Edit
"Also, about the trickle-down economy, the poor don't make the economy run. Someone who makes very little will end up buying what he needs. Someone who makes a lot of money will buy what he needs, what he wants, and will invest. Investment helps new companies start out, therefore helping employ more people. "
Exactly why it would be nice if a few more people made a bit more money-- more people making more money euals more spending. If we keep people down at the bottom, they cannot spend... which hurts the econ.
Also, smhop, what are you talking about it's tough to find a summer job? I found mine in a week and work about 2 mins from my house. I have never had a problem finding a job, you are basing your arguments on false assumptions.
You are apparently not even reading this thread, bc that was in response to another poster who said it was hard for a teen to get a job.
Your beliefs on Regan crack me up- I lived it. All you are spouting in the reqritten history to glorify a now-dead man. That always happens. An individul is mediocre until he dies (or falls out of public view as reagan did) -- then suddenly "he's the greatest".
NO, I am not comapring the current econ to the great depression. I was making an analogy, the point of which you missed... said point being: people do what they have to do in this world, like it or not. And, isnt it nice that there are some protections in place to prevent it from getting so bad as it once was? Whereas you seem to think it would be fine to pull this protection away... well, go live in Mexico or India then-- where you won't have electricty or a car or a newspaper bc your daily wages won't get it for you.
I did not ask the GOV to redistribute wealth... I said, that it is good for us to have some measure of regulation. (IE a 40 hour workweek, no child labor, etc) Minimum wage is merely a teeny tiny regulation that keeps the corps from screwing the little guy.
I am all for capatalism, ayn rand pie in the sky, make your money if you can. But That was fine back in the 50s where the avg Joe could make a living at his own business, and rise up. Avg Joe has a tough time doing that today-- This new econ of corporations is really dangerous ground.
I am agianst corporate wellfare and for more money in the individual's pocket- the individual has great impact on the econ... this is conservative economics... dont pigeonhole me if you can't figure out which hole I belong in.
|By Smhop (Smhop) on Thursday, July 22, 2004 - 03:51 pm: Edit
Ariesathena... I am with you on every point.. though I think a slight raise in Min Wage is due as it has been many years since it went up. Your posts are well said, well thoght through.
Min Wage is not income redist... it certainly is moderate, and I consider it mild neccesary regulation.
Companies are goughing profitt, even when they cut wages.
Eipower: "These aren't people who tricked, lied, and cheated their way to the top...away just because they have more? "
They aren't? Are you here in America where I am? Where the corporate scandal over things like compnay backed loans and $5000 shower doors in companies like Tyco bolstered the Leadership's salary while raping the coffers of the worker's retiremnet funds? Where leadership salaries have increased since 1979/80 to the present in astounding percentages, yet most of America has the same purchasing power or less?
A business man/individual who can make it big should have every opportunity to do so. To start a business, employ others, make a good, solid living at a job you enjoy, have purchasing power, help teh econ, etc... All good stuff: stuff the American dream is made of; Capatalist enterprse.
Getting a degree from a good school,networking a corp leadership position, taking more than you desrve in salary, perks, and etc... leaving nothing for the shareholders, and even less for the workers = corporate theft. Not exactly the American dream.
The first is conservative economics, the other is a slave driven economy. So many people are at the mercy of these big corps... they have no autonomy... I think the more powerful the corps get, the worse off we will be.
|By Jlq3d3 (Jlq3d3) on Thursday, July 22, 2004 - 04:06 pm: Edit
"They aren't? Are you here in America where I am? Where the corporate scandal over things like compnay backed loans and $5000 shower doors in companies like Tyco bolstered"
So they are commiting crimes, it is not like that is legal CEO behavior.
And for every company paying $2 an hour, why would that happen. Why dont companies pay the min wage to everyone now? Because companies want to hire the best employees, and will pay enough so that they can keep their desired employees. A company who pays $5 an hour to every worker would be out of business in a day.
Just pay people what you think they deserve. If it is an appropriate amount, then they will work for you. If it is too low, they won't work for you and you will need to raise your wages.
Min wage is stupid even though it sounds good to pay people more. It is noone's business how much I accept for a job.
|By Bunmushroom (Bunmushroom) on Thursday, July 22, 2004 - 04:10 pm: Edit
If I want to rake leaves for $3.00 an hour, I should be allowed to. If I want to walk someone's dog for $2 an hour, I should be allowed to. It is not the government's business to restrict what jobs I can accept as long as that job is legal and I pay taxes. It is an intrusian on my civil liberties and an insult to my intellegence for goverment to tell me how much I can work for. It is none of their god damn business.
|By Ariesathena (Ariesathena) on Thursday, July 22, 2004 - 04:11 pm: Edit
As I said earlier, CEOs are making about 500 times what they were making ten years ago. They were adequately compensated 10 years ago, let me tell you. You're also making the mistake of equating my rant against them earning $50million/year when other people would do the job for $10 million/year with me saying that they should not be well-compensated. There is a HUGE difference between a CEO earning a few million a year (more than adequate for the jobs they are doing) and the salaries that many of them pull down. When Bradlees went under, many people lost their pensions; the CEO made $6 million that year. Hell, I can run a company into the ground for $6 million! I would do it for a hundreth of that!
Tyco, Worldcomm, Enron. Honest, hard working chaps, right? Remember them?
|By Smhop (Smhop) on Thursday, July 22, 2004 - 04:15 pm: Edit
one last thing: just fyi from wikipedia
"Crony capitalism" is a pejorative expression, denoting a type of capitalism in which business success is heavily dependent upon one's connections. In such a system, business decisions are significantly influenced by friendships and family ties, rather than by market forces and open competition. The term, often abbreviated "crapitalism", is generally used as part of an explanation for why a superficially market-based system fails to generate adequate economic growth. The term has been used to describe the economic systems of Japan, Indonesia and the United States.
Like fascism, "crony capitalism" often describes a close relationship between government and business, but to a much less obvious extent. Instead of the government directly controlling businesses and giving it orders (as is the case with Fascism), the government gives legislative favors to certain businesses or types of businesses - ease of permits, government grants, specially created tax benefits, etc.
^^^^THIS IS NOT TRUE CAPATALISM... I am against ^^^ this "crapatalism".
It hardly makes me a "pinko", nor even a "liberal" to be against this trend in gov/politics/econ... it merely makes me smart ;)
|By Ejpowers87 (Ejpowers87) on Thursday, July 22, 2004 - 04:21 pm: Edit
"They were adequately compensated 10 years ago, let me tell you."
Who are you to say who is making enough money?
When I say CEO is a tough job, I'm talking about LEGALLY running a company. That is why we have laws. What Enron, Worldcomm, and Tyco did was wrong, and they are being prosecuted for it.
|By Demingy (Demingy) on Thursday, July 22, 2004 - 04:29 pm: Edit
"A company who pays $5 an hour to every worker would be out of business in a day.
Just pay people what you think they deserve. If it is an appropriate amount, then they will work for you. If it is too low, they won't work for you and you will need to raise your wages."---
This would be true if there were enough jobs for a large percentage of the population, if there weren't people who have been unemployed for over a year (some who have been unemployed for YEARS), if there weren't so many teenagers who have a difficult time finding jobs, and if we didn't have immigration (especially illegal immigration).
There are far too many people who would accept a job with far less money because they are desperate for anything. Many companies already take advantage of this with minimum wage and they would do it even more if they could hire people at a ridiculously low rate. They wouldn't even have to worry too much about finding talented labor in this economy because there is a lot of talented labor still looking for work (and some at any price just to feed their families).
And, do you really think that those savings would be passed on to the consumer? In your ideal world, maybe, but in the United States the answer would be no (well, maybe you'd have 1/100th of a percent that would).
"If I want to rake leaves for $3.00 an hour, I should be allowed to. If I want to walk someone's dog for $2 an hour, I should be allowed to."---
You are allowed to. These fall under those areas that aren't covered under minimum wage. You can even babysit for less than minimum wage.
In fact, we have people here who sell newspapers on the street for the newspaper agency. These people only keep what they sell the papers for, they don't get paid minimum wage or any wage at all (and no, they can't "just" sell the papers for a lot more money, no one would buy them). This was put in place so the newspaper can increase circulation (and charge higher prices to their advertisers that way) and they are able to take advantage of the fact that the homeless (who are the ones who sell the papers) will take what they can get.
|By Demingy (Demingy) on Thursday, July 22, 2004 - 04:31 pm: Edit
By the way, I did want to point out that I don't believe that raising minimum wage is always a positive thing. Minimum wage that is too high will also have adverse effects on the economy as inflation would increase. In fact, in the economy as it is now I don't think that raising the minimum wage is the answer.....but there don't seem to be too many jobs being created either.
|By Ariesathena (Ariesathena) on Thursday, July 22, 2004 - 04:35 pm: Edit
I lost $7,000 in Worldcomm stock, just letting you know. Also, Ken Lay was just indicted for what he did - years ago. Does prosecution make up for what they did? I don't think that I'm getting any of my money back.
Who are you to say who is making enough money?
Frankly, that's a childish question, but I'll answer it anyway. First of all, I know what it is like to work as a professional and to earn a high salary, but one that is truly earned. So I have more of a clue than other people would. I think I can say that anyone who earns in excess of a million a year is probably well compensated for their work, especially when other people are also working extraordinarily stressful jobs and not making nearly the same. Physicians probably have more stress than CEOs, along with the threat of malpractice. Certainly, they should be compensated for that; yet, their salaries are far lower than those of CEOs of top companies. Simply put, the compensation of CEOs is out of line with other highly specialized, skilled labour, high stress jobs.
Who am I to say? I never heard my grandfather, a Fortune 500 company CEO since the age of 35, complain about his compensation. He's made more than enough money - I could go into the gory details, but suffice to say, there's a lot of cash hanging around.
To answer your question - as someone who has personally known one of said former CEOs and seen the level of compensation, yeah, I think I can say that they did quite well for themselves.
So who are you to say that they were not compensated well? Were you alive then? Were you one of them who felt that $5 million/year was not adequate for your work?
Have a good cry for those poor, underpaid CEOs of the yesteryear, then return here when you can make some well-reasoned and mature arguments.
|By Hunter1985 (Hunter1985) on Thursday, July 22, 2004 - 04:45 pm: Edit
I'm going to restate my post, because we all seem to be focused on the huge corporations, making it easier to say "they can afford it" (with some legitimacy). But we are forgetting about the small businesses:
The reason I'm against a specific and drastic increase is because while big corporations like the ones you mentioned can often afford to pay more, often times it hurts small businesses. It does have a negative effect on the business owners when it is forced. Also, and I do know from experience, small business owners give pay raises on their own based on experience. They do not keep a person on min. wage forever, and I feel it should stay in the hands of the business owners. For those who need the wage to live on, if they're working full time, they will naturally get a larger and larger wage as they continue to work (they won't be on min. wage long). I know that small business owners treat their employees very well and do not need a forced minimum wage.
|By Ariesathena (Ariesathena) on Thursday, July 22, 2004 - 05:00 pm: Edit
Hunter: There's a difference between small businesses, owned by a family, and many other non-large corporations. Small businesses would probably treat people very well, as a personal relationship develops. But what about the busboys at Denny's? While no one at the local Denny's is getting rich, it's probably reasonable to assume that minimum wage is a good thing there.
This all begs the question: if you don't think that the current min. wage is good, what do you think it should be? Dollar amounts and region of the country you are posting from, please.
So, the questions:
1. Do you think we should have min. wage?
2. What do you think min. wage should be?
3. What part of the country are you in?
4. What is the minimum amount you would work for? (Age as well, SmHop and I, being adults, probably will have different answers!)
I obviously am for min. wage, both federal and state; federal so that there is at least some baseline, and state so appropriate cost of living adjustments can be made. I think that about $5/hour is completely fine. I'm in MA, and closer to $6/hour or $6.50 I think it is now is probably reasonable. I don't think I would, as an engineer, work for under $20/hour.
|By Kluge (Kluge) on Thursday, July 22, 2004 - 05:31 pm: Edit
In 1967 the minimum wage was $1.65. Gas cost about $.30/gallon. You could buy a house in a nice neighborhood in California for about $30,000. Tuition at UC Berkeley was about $500 a year.
Obviously, a lot has changed since then. But the minimum wage has changed a lot less than most things. It's really not so much a question of raising the minimum wage as it is reversing some of the cuts that have been made in it by inflation over the years.
|By Ariesathena (Ariesathena) on Thursday, July 22, 2004 - 05:34 pm: Edit
Min. wage to gas price ratio:
1965: 5.5
2004: 2.46
Just for fun.
|By Demingy (Demingy) on Thursday, July 22, 2004 - 05:50 pm: Edit
I'll answer your questions Ariesathena:
1. Do you think we should have min. wage? Yes
2. What do you think min. wage should be? Around $5/hr (in other words, not much of an increase from where we are) in the current economy.
3. What part of the country are you in? Colorado
4. What is the minimum amount you would work for? Given prices here I wouldn't work for anything less than $14/hour (luckily I make more than that)
(Age as well, SmHop and I, being adults, probably will have different answers!) You guys are the only adults 26
|By Demingy (Demingy) on Thursday, July 22, 2004 - 05:52 pm: Edit
Hunter, I agree with your argument as an argument for avoiding raising the minimum willy nilly (sorry, at a loss for words today), but as I mentioned in my argument above there really is a good reason to have *a* minimum wage. There would be far more problems without it (which is why it was created in the first place). It just takes a very fine balance.
|By Smhop (Smhop) on Thursday, July 22, 2004 - 06:45 pm: Edit
Kluge said "Obviously... is reversing some of the cuts that have been made in it by inflation over the years. " Yes!! yes, yes.. I agree. Min wage earners have less purchasing power today than previously.
Hunter: The problem is, that we really don't have an economy dependent upon small business anymore-- we did in the 50s, but it is long gone. That is the point I was making with my long anti-corporate posts. Further, most family owned businesses are willing to do better by the thier employees anyway. Mimimum wage is a regulation to prevent any workers from being taken advantage of.
Aries: Again, well stated!
So, the questions:
1. Do you think we should have min. wage? Yes.
2. What do you think min. wage should be?
In a perfect world fed minimum would be 7.50. It would take a two year plan to get it there, but I think it needs to be there. Working full-time this would still only equate to about 15k a year, sadly, that is less than the federal poverty level for a family of three! Shouldn't our federal minimum guarantee living above the poverty level?
Otherwise, why would one work at all??? Just screw the job and go on welfare which by the way, pays more than minimum wage in many states.
* In fact, a mother on welfare in R.I. gets compensated better than if she actually went out and got a full time minimum wage job. How awful is that?
3. What part of the country are you in? Currently SC.
4. What is the minimum amount you would work for? Hmm, I would not like to work for less than 30k, which is 14 bucks and hour or so. If I am going to be out of the home, not with my kids, and paying extra taxes as well as daycare expense... I certainly cannot work for min wage. On the other hand, if I *needed* money desperately, then I guess I would do whatever I had to do to support my kids--- work for $5 bucks an hour? Well, that would make life pretty miserable for my family. God forbid my hubbie looses his job, becomes disabled... I am not a professional, How would I support us?!!?
Its not happening on a min wage job, let me tell you =(
|By Takiusproteus (Takiusproteus) on Thursday, July 22, 2004 - 07:24 pm: Edit
Raise minimum wage
Pass legislation that bans the laying-off of employees until the point that the CEO's own salary is equal to that of the most poorly-paid full-time worker.
|By Fenix_Three (Fenix_Three) on Thursday, July 22, 2004 - 08:06 pm: Edit
Yeah... econ stuff. Well technically minimum wage will increase unemployment, however, this is also temporary. Other measures can help put employment back on track. And no, economists don't agree that 5% unemployment is good. We need about 3% unemployment, and only frictional at that. That means we'd like to have some college graduates who are looking for jobs and some people who are moving to a different city/state. Right now the official unemployment may be around 5%, but that's only because so many people have given up looking for work and are no longer counted in the labor force. I'd say that raising minimum wage gradually with respect to inflation is a reasonable demand. I think the 70's had the best minimum wage even if it was below $5.00/hour. Oh yeah, as for redistributing wealth, min wage won't do that. Do you expect the CEO's to give up their salaries to pay their employees? I didn't think so.
Can you tell I want to be an econ major?
|By Rachelvishy (Rachelvishy) on Friday, July 23, 2004 - 01:23 am: Edit
"Pass legislation that bans the laying-off of employees until the point that the CEO's own salary is equal to that of the most poorly-paid full-time worker. "
You're funny!
Before reading the arguments on this post, I was adamant for raising minimum wage. But now, I see that simply raising it more than a dollar at one time could negatively affect the economy. Given the example of the mother with the formula, I believe what we should do is deal with that- perhaps, we can raise the wage by no more than 75 cents for the next few years, and instead pass laws protecting those cases- providing free formula, rehab, hospital visits, drastically discounted apartments, everything that is needed that the current minimum wage fails to provide. This way, a raise will not be necessary, and we are sure that the money is indeed going to a good use.
|By Smhop (Smhop) on Friday, July 23, 2004 - 02:01 am: Edit
We have welfare. But, far better would be to have an ecconomy where it makes sense for a single mom to work, than to have an economy where welfare babies produce more generations of welfare babies.
I know several women who refuse to work (single moms) bc the state will take better care of them than they could manage to do out on thier own. That's so sad. The money should be spent on job training and child care so the woman gets a hand up instead of a hand-out.
Unfortunately, there will always be those few bad apples... the dug-addicted etc-- who for whatever reason in this world cannot or willnot take care of themselves. For those pathetic souls we need welfare assistance, but I am not a big believer in welfare (too much abuse and fraud) so IMO very firm lines would have to be drawn between those who should be "supported" and those who should be given alternate means of assistance (job training etc).
However, without a livable wage-- there is no reason for these people to ever get off the welfare roles. WHICH means, you and I support them with OUR tax dollars... and that, really ticks me off. =(
A livable wage would put money in the pockets of the poor, and also return some tax dollars to the middle class. (Bonus for both!) Entitlements take up a huge portion of the gov budget, and it is off the backs of the middle class.
|By Gidget (Gidget) on Friday, July 23, 2004 - 09:22 am: Edit
HOLY CRAP- the minimum wage is the U.S is $5.15 ????? .. here in Canada it's $6.85
|By Twinkletoes696 (Twinkletoes696) on Friday, July 23, 2004 - 09:23 am: Edit
I think the minimum wage should be whatever it takes to live somewhat above the poverty line.
Would this hurt the economy? Probably, I don't know, I'm being idealistic.
|By Ejpowers87 (Ejpowers87) on Friday, July 23, 2004 - 09:27 am: Edit
Gidget, is that Canadian Dollars?
Also, it would hurt the economy by increasing inflation. While idealistically it may seem right to increase the minimum wage, as long as there is a minimum wage it will not be enough to live on. Supply and demand will always take over.
If $7 is enough to live on now, pretty soon it won't be if min wage is increased.
|By Conker (Conker) on Friday, July 23, 2004 - 09:44 am: Edit
Yeah, let's raise the minimum wage so more manufacturing jobs go to China! At the moment, if we convert our cost of living ($30,000/year) to RMB (240,000/year), we do not get their cost of living (10,000/year). The minimum wage is part of a larger scheme that drives this cost of living skyward. Now I'm not saying that we should abolish the minimum wage. If that happened, then many Americans wouldn't even be making enough to survive (although abolishing the minimum wage would be the quickest fix). I believe that the economy will correct itself, and that manufacturing jobs will EVENTUALLY come back to America. But when is "eventually"? And during this period of waiting, the lower-class Americans will suffer greatly, only increasing the disparity between the rich and the poor.
Disclaimer: I am not a rabid capitalist, nor a libertarian. In fact, surveys show that I have considerable socialist leanings. But I am divided on many issues, and this is one of them.
|By Bunmushroom (Bunmushroom) on Friday, July 23, 2004 - 02:58 pm: Edit
minimum wage is making more outsourcing, and raising it will make it a lot worse. It will kill so many jobs.
|By Scubasteve (Scubasteve) on Friday, July 23, 2004 - 03:06 pm: Edit
"Stricter regulation of companies hiring illegals? First of all, the first thing that the illegal immigrants do when they enter the country is break federal law. We should allow them to stay and take jobs that many Americans would take?"
Since you seem to me such a hard spoken conservative, I take pleasuring in informing you that Bush supports the exact policy that you just chasitized.
|By Gidget (Gidget) on Friday, July 23, 2004 - 03:19 pm: Edit
No it's in Pesos... - Yes it's in Canadian dollars and I was wrong it ranges by provinces from $7 in Manitoab to $8.50 in Nunavut
|By Xiggi (Xiggi) on Friday, July 23, 2004 - 03:45 pm: Edit
The problem with raising minimum wages is that it ends up hurting the people that the policy would intent to help.
The minimum wages are no longer meant to ensure someone LIVING wages. It is meant to represent a floor for entry-level jobs. Instead of helping the poor, a minimum-wage increase could kick many of them out of the job market. If a business views the minimum wage as too high, they won't debate the issue, they will simply hire fewer employees.
Of the 1.5 percent of the workforce that earns the minimum wage or below (about 2.1 million people), more than half are under age 25. More than 500,000 of them are between the ages of 16 and 19, which means that they likely live with a parent or relative, are in school and work part-time for extra pocket change. Many of the rest of them are in entry-level or temporary jobs, which means they likely will get raises in the future. (Indeed, a study of minimum-wage earners revealed that 63 percent saw their wages increase over a year.)
As the Wall Street Journal notes: "Three-fifths are in the leisure and hospitality industry, which means in jobs that often come with tips in addition to wages." Furthermore, unmarried workers are more likely to earn the minimum wage or less than their married counterparts. And finally, only 15 percent of those earning the minimum wage or below are lone earners with children.
For flame-bait purposes, here's an additional conservative view of the subject!
|By Ariesathena (Ariesathena) on Friday, July 23, 2004 - 04:00 pm: Edit
SmHop: Yes, giving people the tools to better their condition is often better than giving them handouts. You are absolutely correct in that welfare kicks in far below 2,000 hours of min. wage jobs. That's why I'm a big fan of subsidized child care: hopefully, women can put their kids in day care, get a job, and through the job, help themselves, earn some money, set a good example for the kids, have some self-respect (which is apparently a big issue - many people would love to work and want the respect), and get some job experience so they can get a better job and get off welfare.
Just a thought, but a county in Illinois got everyone off its welfare rolls. Basically, they did very intense job training, subsidized day care, psychological treatment, and checked up on the people as they began jobs. It is less expensive than having people on welfare and, obviously, gets people to be self-sufficient.
Just a data point so we can all talk about it: 1/3 of homeless people have severe psychological problems, such as bipolar, alcoholism (many drink Listerine when they cannot get booze), or schizophrenia.
|By Demingy (Demingy) on Friday, July 23, 2004 - 04:18 pm: Edit
Ariesathena, don't forget PTSD (post traumatic stress disorder). Many of the homeless people that I knew were war veterans who suffered from PTSD.
|By Kluge (Kluge) on Friday, July 23, 2004 - 04:53 pm: Edit
For your consideration on this topic: Over the past 20 years, the overall wealth of the USA, adjusted for inflation and population growth, has increased by over 50%. If that increase had been shared among all economic sectors, the poor would still be poor, but would be 50% better off financially than they were in the 80's, as would the middle class, the wealthy, etc.
But it hasn't been equally shared. The segment of the nation who earn less than $30,000 per year (current dollars) actually are worse off now than they were twenty years ago. The middle class - from $30,000 - $100,000 (current dollars) have seen a little increase in income (<10%), $100,000 - $300,000 have enjoyed a 15 - 20% increase in income. All of the rest of the increase in wealth has gone to the top 1% of the economy. The rich have gotten very rich. The poor continue to get poorer.
So if you want to debate the consequences of minor economic regulations, consider that you are starting at a point where the economic disparity between the poor and the wealthy is far greater than at any time in recent history - and is increasing.
|By Ariesathena (Ariesathena) on Friday, July 23, 2004 - 05:04 pm: Edit
Kluge: this is just my guess, and if you have data to back it up or refute it, that would be great... but I don't think it's the top 1% that are really doing well. It's probably the top 1/2 or 1/4 or 1/10th of 1% - it's not the professionals, but the CEOs, athletes, or top managers. I could be wrong, but I think that the wealth is going to the extreme top of people - the one in a few hundred are making obsence salaries, while the rest of the top 1% are doing well, but are still "upper middle class."
To quantify, top 1% is $293,000/year, right? The massive increase in wealth probably has not gone to the $300k/year crowd so much as the few million per year crowd... the extremely wealthy.
|By Xiggi (Xiggi) on Friday, July 23, 2004 - 05:28 pm: Edit
I do not doubt your statistics for a second.
However, for a person to earn $30,000/year, he must be paid at roughly 3 times the minimum wages.
The level of minimum wages does little to help citizens emerge from poverty.
|By Ejpowers87 (Ejpowers87) on Friday, July 23, 2004 - 06:11 pm: Edit
Scuba, good point, and that is one of the biggest problems I have w/ GWB. He has been AWFUL on the domestic side of his presidency, but I cannot image Kerry being any better (actaully, he would be much worse). Also, I will vote for GWB because he has done a great job in keeping America safe after 9/11
|By Craigk10 (Craigk10) on Friday, July 23, 2004 - 06:46 pm: Edit
Ejpowers -- let's not speak to soon.
(By the way -- what exactly has he done?)
|By Kluge (Kluge) on Friday, July 23, 2004 - 07:13 pm: Edit
Xiggi - You're right - and those earning the minimum wage have lost the most ground over that same period. In fact, the entire economic progess/regress picture appears to be a gentle curve, with the bottom losing the most ground, and the top gaining the most. Break even looks to be right around $30,000.
And I'll rise to the flame bait as well. The interesting thing about the article in the Spectator is that it argues that - despite actual real life experience to the contrary - increasing the minimum wage really does cause job loss. (He give's "explanations" for why it didn't happen when the minimum wage was raised in the recent past, and cites expert opinions as being more significant than actual events.)
I'm curious regarding the theory that raising the minimum wage results in fewer jobs. The minimum wage jobs I see are at places like McDonalds. (No tips.) Exactly which of those employees would be fired if the minimum wage was raised? It's not like they're not doing anything that doesn't need to be done. It seems to me that if they were unnecessary they wouldn't be hired - at $5.15 or $7. I'm having a tough time trying to picture the job which exists at $5.15/hour and won't exist if the minimum wage is $7.
|By Ejpowers87 (Ejpowers87) on Friday, July 23, 2004 - 07:56 pm: Edit
Craigk10 are you talking about what he did to keep us safer? Perhaps the Invasion of Iraq and Afghanistan and the Patriot Act.
|By Poison_Ivy (Poison_Ivy) on Friday, July 23, 2004 - 08:00 pm: Edit
I don't know why I ingored this thread for such a long time. I just believe the minimum should be $6. But personally I don't really care (sorry if that should shallow). But I agree on completely head with the fact lots of people will lose a job and not be able to buy a meal. I think Bush should pay more attention to home issues than overseas. That's why I'm with Kerry.
|By Craigk10 (Craigk10) on Friday, July 23, 2004 - 08:00 pm: Edit
I am not going to respond with anything more than disagreement because this thread is not the place nor will anything come of it. Despite that I shudder at even the mention of the Patriot Act.
|By Craigk10 (Craigk10) on Friday, July 23, 2004 - 08:02 pm: Edit
Just so you know many experts (anonymous CIA agent who has written a book recently -- title escapes me) argue that the actions abroad since 9/11 have actually made things worse. So at a minimum it is not as clear cut as you make it. Sorry but I had to say something.
|By Jlq3d3 (Jlq3d3) on Friday, July 23, 2004 - 08:20 pm: Edit
You cant pay people more than what their jobs are worth without bad consequences. Something will have to give. Many will lose their jobs because they arnt able to perform a higher wage job, more wont be hired in the first place because the cost of labor will be too high, more jobs will be outsourced, products for all will become more expensive.... Min wage hurts most the people it is intended to help.
On a theoretical basis so that you can imagine the effects on a larger more visable scale (1 dollar hike is bad enough, but just for an easier view: ), why dont we rasie the min wage to 50$ an hour, than we'd all be rich! Not exactly, the opposite would happen.
And it is so obvious with empirical evidence; min wage leaves more people, espessially those with low skills and education, with no job. Unemployment rates and homelessness in Santa Monica, a place with the highest in min wage in the US is horrible. Not only do people not get hired, but it is a huge disincentive to start new businesses, businesses which would bring much needed jobs to students and those with low education. It is a horrible horrible policy pratically, and it is a harmful intrusian of govt into the lives of people.
|By Ariesathena (Ariesathena) on Saturday, July 24, 2004 - 12:42 am: Edit
Editorial in today's Boston Globe:
|By Benzo415 (Benzo415) on Saturday, July 24, 2004 - 08:52 am: Edit
I was at Boys State last month, and a few kids were arguing that there should be a huge minimum wage increase to $12-14! This is very radical, even in a state like Vermont, but since the few people who wanted this were the heads of my party, the Federalists (Democrats), this came onto our party's platform.
Now raising it this high is a terrible idea, as it will cause major outsourcing of labor. Many big companies will not want to pay their part-time employees $14/hour, especially someone like a Wal-Mart cashier.
But yes there should be a minimum wage, or else we might start paying workers as little as $1/hour, practically bringing back slavery. Maybe it should go up a little depending on the area, but right now it's pretty good where it is I think.
|By Salamanda (Salamanda) on Friday, July 30, 2004 - 06:12 pm: Edit
i wasn't sure what min. wage was...but everyone around here is payed like $7.50+/hr min. wage- and we're just a small town in Oregon
Report an offensive message on this page E-mail this page to a friend
|Posting is currently disabled in this topic. Contact your discussion moderator for more information.
|Administrator's Control Panel -- Board Moderators Only
Administer Page


text:
Morning Mindbender
Morning Mindbender-August 8 The average man does this six times a week, the average woman three times. What is it? Answer: Shake hands08 Aug 13
Local News, Multimedia, Sports - The Local Connection
Wheeler Dealer
Morning Mindbender-August 8 The average man does this six times a week, the average woman three times. What is it? Answer: Shake hands08 Aug 13
Garden Salsa 3 ripe tomatoes …08 Aug 13
The Worthington woman who kidnapped an employee at the New Ulm Wal-Mart last year and claimed there was a bomb in the store has been sentenced to nearly 2 years in prison after violating her …08 Aug 13
A Glencoe man that the State Patrol initially reported was killed in a motorcycle accident in Winona County Wednesday morning is apparently alive and well. The accident happened at just after 11am on Highway 61. …08 Aug 13
The man who was the object of several manhunts in Blue Earth County while he evaded custody for several weeks made an appearance in court Tuesday. 31-year-old Jacob Friedrichs was eventually found at his girlfriend's …08 Aug 13
A Mankato man is facing multiple criminal charges after allegedly fleeing from a hospital he was a patient at prior to being discharged. Authorities say that 35-year-old Michael Lee Larson had active warrants out for …08 Aug 13
A rodeo bull that got loose at the Dakota County Fair on Wednesday injured several people, including a woman who was airlifted to a hospital and a sheriff's deputy who shot the beast before he …08 Aug 13
The Nicollet County Fair got underway on Wednesday in St. Peter, but there was one thing missing: the carnival rides. Crescent City Amusements from Louisiana was a no-show when the fair got started, but replacement …08 Aug 13
Four members of Twin Valley Council Boy Scout Troop 25. Brian Longtin, age 13; Glenn Howell, age 16; Jeremy Holm, age 16; and Bennett Carlson, age 12, received this months Hometown Hero Award. The youths …


text: Name: Sam Bass, editor Age: 35 Height: 6'1" Weight: 190Dream Ski: Elan Apex 88, because I want a narrower all-mountain ski—it rocked at our ski test and is a bit more versatile and less groomer-focused than the AC50.Preferred terrain: powder, trees, groomers, bowls—you name it.Your go-to ski for the last few seasons, and why you ski it day after day, year after year: For powder/chop: Rossignol S7, because it floats and smears over anything, but still carves well on groomed snow for when I need to get back to the lift. For touring: K2 HardSide, because it's extremely versatile (inbounds and out) and lightweight, and uses K2's fantastic, user-friendly climbing-skin system. For groomers: Volkl AC50, because I can tip them way over on edge and feel incredibly secure as they rip from carve to carve.Goals for the season: To ski Alta when the canyon is closed to incoming traffic because of snow; to finally make it to British Columbia, Tahoe, and Big Sky.


text:
Did you know that every year, Americans use more than 100 billion plastic bags and that only about 13 percent of the bags are recycled? Not only is that a lot of waste, but the polyethylene plastic bags – which are non-biodegradable and made from nonrenewable resources (crude oil and natural gas) – are one of the most challenging items for the recycling industry to manage.
Argonne Scholar Dr. Vilas Pol didn't feel like waiting the hundreds of years it would take for the plastic bags to decompose, so he figured out a way to convert the bags into carbon nanotubes that can be used as components for lithium-ion batteries. That's right: thanks to Dr. Pol, those pesky grocery bags could potentially help power our cars. Watch Dr. Pol explain more below:
The technology is one of the cheapest and most environmentally-friendly ways to grow nanotubes, reducing the amount of waste going into landfills and potentially resulting in less-expensive batteries. In addition, Pol's method can be applied to other notoriously annoying plastic products, like water bottles, to clean up more environmental nuisances.
While large companies manufacture much of the glassware found in labs – the basic beakers, flasks and test-tubes – scientists often need nonstandard equipment for their specific experiments, which is where glassblowers like Russell Lewis come in.
Photo Credit Idaho National Laboratory
Lewis has been working with scientists at Idaho National Laboratory for over a decade, making specialty glassware that requires both artistry and know-how to meet the experiments' needs. The innovative ideas require thoughtful execution. Lewis explains, "They'll give me their concept, I usually have to figure out how to make it work." See Lewis in action >
In stomach-churning news, it turns out we have approximately three pounds of bacteria living in our gut. Thankfully, most of these bacteria are helpful and influence things like our immune system development and metabolism. Because these tiny stowaways have such an impact on our health, scientists at Argonne took a closer look and determined the three-dimensional structure of one of these bacterial enzymes, finding it plays a fundamental role in digestion by breaking down sugar polymers to simple glucose. This important discovery could help scientists and doctors better understand the impact of these organisms on diseases like diabetes. Learn how >
Scientists at Ames Laboratory have developed a new process to make batteries that are both "greener" and more cost-efficient. Neodymium iron boron magnets – found in every computer, and every hybrid and electric vehicle as well as a wide array of consumer, commercial and even military products – make up about $4 billion of the magnet industry worldwide. However, over the years production has shifted outside the U.S. to low-cost-producing countries. The new process from Ames Lab has the potential to produce the permanent magnets economically here in the U.S., without the environmentally unfriendly byproducts that result from traditional manufacturing methods.
Senior metallurgist Karl A. Gschneidner, Jr., who co-developed the process, explains: "Neodymium iron boron magnets represent perhaps one of the most important use of rare earth elements. They're the most powerful magnets in the world."
EDITOR'S NOTE: This blog entry was updated on 08/23/10 to correct the amount of plastic bags used to 100 billion. The amount was previously incorrectly identified as 100 million.


text:
Contact Us
About CLDF
Centers of Educational Expertise
Live CME Meetings
Slide Library
Abstract Library
Conference Highlights
HCV | Abstract Library
The summaries are free for public use. The Chronic Liver Disease Foundation will continue to add and archive summaries of articles deemed relevant to CLDF by the Board of Trustees and its Advisors.
Abstract Details
Effect of hepatitis C virus infection on erythropoiesis in patients on hemodialysis
Saifan C, El-Charabaty E, Kleiner M, El-Sayegh S. Int J Nephrol Renovasc Dis. 2013 Jun 28;6:121-4. doi: 10.2147/IJNRD.S44656. Print 2013.
Department of Medicine, Division of Nephrology, Staten Island University Hospital, Staten Island, NY, USA.
BACKGROUND: Erythropoietin is a hormone that regulates erythropoiesis and is mainly produced by the kidneys. Several animal studies as well as a few case reports and case series have demonstrated that regenerating hepatic tissue can produce more erythropoietin than normal hepatic tissue. The purpose of the study was to examine the difference in hemoglobin and hematocrit levels as well as epoetin dosage in patients on hemodialysis with and without hepatitis C (HCV).
METHODS: A retrospective chart review was performed. Seventy-six patients were included in the study (19 with HCV and 57 without HCV) at a ratio of 1:3. Exclusion criteria were a history of gastrointestinal bleeding or blood transfusion over the previous six months, polycystic kidney disease, and pregnancy. Variables examined included gender, age, duration of hemodialysis, hemoglobin, hematocrit, epoetin dose, aspartate transaminase, and ferritin levels over a three-month period.
RESULTS: The patients were divided into two groups. The first consisted of patients with HCV on hemodialysis and the second of patients on hemodialysis without HCV. Mean hemoglobin was 12.6 ± 1.2 g/dL for the HCV-positive group and 11.9 ± 1.1 g/dL for the HCV-negative group. The difference was statistically significant (P = 0.03). Mean hematocrit was higher in the HCV-positive group, but was not significantly different at 39.08% ± 4.06% versus 37.43% ± 3.4% in the HCV-negative group (t-test, P = 0.11). Further, the HCV-positive group required less epoetin, but this was not significantly different from that required in the HCV-negative group at 6258 ± 5208 IU versus 7596 ± 7056 IU, respectively (t-test, P = 0.38).
CONCLUSION: In our study, patients with HCV infection were found to have higher hemoglobin and hematocrit levels and lower epoetin requirements than those without HCV. Although the findings were not statistically significant, the computed values between these two groups of patients did follow a general trend. Further investigation with more patients, a longer duration of follow-up, and incorporation of additional medical variables is needed to clarify the role of HCV on erythropoiesis in hemodialysis patients.
Slide Library
Abstract Library
Slide Library
Abstract Library
Slide Library
Abstract Library
Live CME Meetings
Slide Library
Abstract Library
Slide Library
Abstract Library
About CLDF
Mission Statement
Board of Trustees
Board of Advisors
CLDF Supporters
Other Resources
Liver News Library
Journal Abstracts
Hep C Link to Care
Centers of
Educational Expertise
Substance Use Disorder
The Chronic Liver Disease Foundation is a non-profit organization with content developed specifically for healthcare professionals.
© Copyright 2012-2016 Chronic Liver Disease Foundation. All rights reserved. This site is maintained as an educational resource for US healthcare providers only.
Use of this Web site is governed by the Chronic Liver Disease Foundation
terms of use
privacy statement


text:
Just making the subs, if M,X,c,P are given you have:
Let + is XOR
Is it possible to get back b if M, X, P is Given ??Code:b + X = d c + P = e d + e = M
if thats not possible is it possible if c is also Given . b is not possible to Be given.
If possible please tell teh expression. and I think its possible.
And please first try to solve if c is not given .
Thanks .
I think (I am not in touch of Maths for 2 years [I might be wrong])
m = d Xor e [m is given]
d = b Xor X
here to get the value of b we need to substitute d with b Xor X
and as e is not given we must substitute
but only relation of e is given is e = c Xor P
and that relates with c
we cant get rid of c .
I thought about another way also by Xoring e with c
So e Xor c = c Xor c Xor P but its not possible cause there is no other relations (only one relation) that relates with c.
So I thing Its not possible.


text:
Check your Domain Availability...
Web Hosting PlansView our top plans. Select the one that suits you best!
Features & ServicesChoose the best service for you packed with lots of features at your disposal!
Easy-to-use Hosting Services From AjwebHost.comAjwebHost.com is a popular web hosting supplier, offering you a 1-stop solution for administering your personal or business Internet presence. Our multilingual web hosting Control Panel allows you to effortlessly administer your websites.
You will be able to use the latest stable versions of MySQL and PgSQL and to choose your PHP version (PHP 4/5/6). 99.9 percent network uptime and thirty-day money-back guarantees are included too.
Other hosting services
- Dedicated Servers - from $75.00 /mo
- Semi-Dedicated - from $30.00 /mo
- KVM VPS - from $1.00 /mo
- OpenVZ VPS - from $1.00 /mo
Hosting features
- An Advanced Hosting Control Panel
- A web Apps Installer
- Free Website Templates
- A 24/7/365 Customer Support Service


text:
GoingOutGuide Movies
Subscribe: Home Delivery | Digital
Broken family's trail of carnage
By Stephanie Merry
Friday, February 18, 2011
With so many marriages ending in divorce these days, making a heartfelt movie about the carnage wrought by a broken family seems like an easy feat. And yet, for all the promising fodder, the talky, acrid "Twelve Thirty" feels soulless, an emotion-free zone that deals its darkness in a shockingly flip manner.
Jeff Lipsky's dialogue-heavy drama follows a broken family living in the Midwest - two very different sisters, their fur-selling mother and her ex-husband, their (sporadically) gay father. Meanwhile, each member of the family has a telling moment with Jeff (Jonathan Groff), a young man who gives off a creepy vibe usually reserved for onscreen sociopaths. Yet he somehow manages to make his way into the bed of the younger sister (well, technically it's the older sister's bed, but you get the picture), before moving on to the older sister - a 22-year-old virgin - in a sickening, forceful way. The disturbing scene takes place in complete darkness. When those fronts have been conquered, Jeff tests his luck with the girls' mother. It's a cynical story, and to make matters worse, it's not even particularly entertaining.
The relentless dialogue feels stilted and forced. While some filmmakers, say Noah Baumbach or Woody Allen (in a good year), can make that work, it's more like a hammer to the eardrum here. The characters clearly believe what they're saying is clever, but it usually isn't. Most of the chatter is either inane (talk of varicose veins in unmentionable regions, discussions of lip balm) or cruel, as when the mother tells her daughter she sort of regrets having kids.
There are, thankfully, a couple of bright spots. Namely, Mamie Gummer, otherwise known as the daughter of acting goddess Meryl Streep. Gummer inherited her mother's curiously captivating features, command of the camera and, if this is any evidence, ability to slip into a role completely. She's the suffering older sister, who's drowning in her own pain and can't seem to find an outlet. Whenever she's on screen, she might as well be under a spotlight. Although her best friend, Irina (played by Halley Feiffer), a Satan worshipper convinced that Champagne was first made in Illinois, makes a worthy bid to steal the show.
There is also a charming scene in which two batty old Brits show up for a couple of minutes to inject the story with some tenderness before disappearing, never to be seen again. But the truth is, most of the characters aren't particularly likable, nor do they seem to enjoy one another's company, which begs the question: If the people on screen don't care about one another, why should we?


text:
You Save: $
msrp: $
This is Brandon Westgate's new signature shoe designed for skateboarding from Emerica. The Emerica Brandon Westgate G6 Shoes Black/White are loaded with all the stuff you need in a skate shoe. Westgate and Emerica detailing throughout.
- Ultra light weight: Three part G6 inspired performance outsole system
- Cushion: High rebound lightweight G6 foam midsole for high impact protection
- Support: Stabilizing carriage for added support
- Grip: Tri-Angle Tread pattern provides maximum grip for more confident skating
- Forefoot Flex: Forefoot Flex windows allow for immediate break-in and added comfort flex
- Performance Features: Asymmetrical G6 inspired design with medial "Cold Air Intake"
- Alternating lace loops for added lacing options to save laces
- Lightweight paneling keeps the upper simple and doesn't offer many points of abrasion blow out
- Reynolds inspired internal support wings for bootie type secure fitting.
- Achilles relief collar padding
Emerica products MAY NOT be sold and/or delivered to addresses outside the U.S.
More From Emerica Skate Shoes
best sellerAvailable Sizes 8.5 9 9.5 10 10.5 11 11.5 12 13
Available Sizes 8 8.5 9 9.5 10 10.5 11 11.5 12
Available Sizes 8 8.5 9 9.5 10 10.5 11 11.5 12 13
Available Sizes 12


text:
A nutritional approach to the treatment of HIV infection—same old woo?
I get all sorts of mail. I get mail from whining Scientologists, suffering patients, angry quacks—and I get lots of promotional material. I get letters from publishers wanting me to review books, letters from pseudo-bloggers wanting me to plug their advertiblog—really, just about anything you can imagine.
Most of the time I just hit "delete"; it's obvious that they've never read my blog and they're just casting a wide net for some link love. But a recent email from a PR firm piqued my interest: (it's a long letter, and I won't be offended if you simply reference it rather than read the whole thing now):


text:
Well, here I am again, cussing and discussing the same old problem that I complained about some eight years ago when I was chairman of the City of Refugio Substandard Building Commission.
The "garbage" dump across from H-E-B grocery store — not only has it always been an eyesore, but definitely has been, in my opinion, a health hazard.
I have discussed this situation on several occasions with City Councilmen Frank Hosey and Joey Heard. I was advised by Mr. Heard that he has attempted to have this item placed on the meeting agenda, but, the powers-that-be (the city secretary and mayor) will not do so.
This structure has been collapsed and the garbage, trash and remains still are there.
What does it take to get our city to do what is right?


text:
Charleston, W.Va. – West Virginia Secretary of State Natalie E. Tennant, the state's chief elections officer, said today that she wanted to remind everyone in the state to make sure they are registered and know where to vote in the upcoming special gubernatorial election.
What better way to reach every voter in the state than during the annual Friends of Coal Bowl, the football clash between Marshall and West Virginia?
"It seems like everyone you talk to is interested in this game," Tennant said. "And that's great. This game showcases our state on national television. And it's going to be a great game. But people also need to remember there is an election coming up that affects everyone in the state."
Tennant's office began running radio advertisements this week during the weekly radio shows of Marshall Coach Doc Holliday and WVU Coach Dana Holgorsen. The spots will also air during the pregame and postgame shows on both team's statewide network. The spots remind people that coaches have to make difficult decisions on game day and voters have to make one too.
"This isn't an all-out blitz media campaign. But as people are relaxing and listening to the coaches talk about the game plan, or when they are tailgating during the pregame, or driving home during the postgame, they'll hear me reminding them to make sure they are registered and know where they vote. Voting and football are American traditions, and I hope people are as excited about voting as they are about seeing Marshall and West Virginia run out onto the field Sunday."
The ads will run until early October, just days before the October 4 special election.
The deadline to register to vote in the special gubernatorial general election is September 13.
Early voting for the 2011 special gubernatorial general election begins on September 21. Voters can cast their ballot early at their courthouse or courthouse annex during regular business hours.
Early voting will also be available on Saturday, September 24 and October 1. October 1 is also the final day of early voting.
Voting will be available at precincts around the state on October 4, 2011 from 6:30 AM to 7:30 PM.
More information about the 2011 Special Gubernatorial Election can be found here.
Privacy, Security and Accessibility | WV.gov | USA.gov | © 2016 State of West Virginia


text:
(Slim Thug gives free Thanksgiving meals to Houston residents)
By Maurice Bobb
Houston-bred rapper Slim Thug joined members of custom car shop 713 Motoring on Tuesday (November 22) to deliver free turkeys to needy families at the Bread of Life homeless shelter in his hometown. The Boss Hogg Outlaw, infamous for his candy paint-drenched lyrics, owes much of his wood grain grippin' to the 713 crew, who have tricked out many of the whips in his fleet. So when they asked him to ride shotgun for their turkey drive, Thugga tells MTV News that he didn't hesitate to hop on board for H-Town's less fortunate.
"Usually, every year me and a few of my homeboys go to the hood, go to the store and just buy turkeys and pass 'em out the back of a U-Haul," Slim Thug told MTV News. "But this year, I got a call from 713 Motoring, they say they puttin' together a turkey drive and they wanted me to get with 'em on it. They the homeys, they work on cars, they worked on my cars before, so I came out and we passed out turkeys to the people, just trying to give back for Thanksgiving."
In addition to the 400 plump holiday birds passed out by Slim, the Houston Food Bank provided patrons with boxes filled with other provisions such as milk and potatoes to help round out their Thanksgiving feasts.
"It's just good to give back to the community," Slim said. "You always gotta look back and remember times when you were that person that needed something and was looking for a hand. You always gotta give back, man, that's the only way you gonna get blessed, if you keep blessin'."
Slim Thug is currently putting the finishing touches on his next solo album, Hogg Life. He is releasing new songs for free download every "Thug Thursday" via his Twitter handle @slimthugga.
Video credit: Kendrick Asibor, Evesborough Films


text:
Click here for more videos
All German Auto Sales Department puts all of our vehicles through our rigorous inspection to make sure our AGA standards are met. We offer our customers the peace of mind and reassurance that they deserve when purchasing a quality vehicle. All German Auto offers a variety of vehicle financing options and warranties as well as a variety of pre-purchase inspections.
Click here to see available vehicles
"All German Auto is top-notch and of the highest caliber. My BMW M5 has never run better!"
Go to testimonials page here
"I was practically drooling when I walked in here. Dinan M5's, 911 turbos, M3's and a few other rare gems."
Go to testimonials page here
"I contacted my local BMW dealer, they quoted $8700 for labor and $2800.00 for parts!!"
Go to testimonials page here
All German Auto is an Authorized dealer for Dinan/BMW auto parts. Learn more about Dinan and what they do at their webpage.
All German Auto is a proud partner with Evolution Motorsports.
Performance Proven on the Track, Perfected for the Street.
All German Motorsports manufactures and sells a complete line of high end products and accessories specifically designed for the harsh demands of off-road. Click here to visit our on-line store. www.allgermanmotorsports.com
All German Auto is an Authorized dealer for Bavsound speakers. A high-quality product with rugged performance and amazing sound quality. www.bavsound.com
Sales Hours:
Monday 10:00AM - 7:00PM
Tuesday 9:00AM - 6:00PM
Wednesday 10:00AM - 7:00PM
Thursday 9:00AM - 6:00PM
Friday 9:00AM - 6:00PM
Saturday By Appointment
Sunday By Appointment
Service & Parts Hours:
Monday-Friday 7:30AM - 6:00PM
Shop Hours:
Monday-Friday 8:00AM - 5:00PM
Copyright © 2010 All German Auto • All Rights Reserved • Privacy Policy
height="0" width="0" style="display:none;visibility:hidden">


text:
We hope Kanye is Read more →
Posts Tagged 'Kid Ink'
Not gonna lie this caught our attention, in rare form Kid Ink manages to get Raekwon on the same track to bring fans Work's Never Over. Continue reading "Kid Ink & Raekwon – Work's Never Over" »
Very dope video for a dope track that features a sick verse from Honey Cocaine and Kid Ink of Dizzy's The Golden Age mixtape directed by Armen Soudjian.
Continue reading "Video: Dizzy Wright Feat. Kid Ink & Honey Cocaine – Fashion" »
Kid Ink, XXL Freshman Class of 2012 will be in Chicago performing live in Chicago July 13th at Congress Theater and The Famouz Life and HHRAPiNFO will give you the opportunity to win two free tickets.
**UPDATE** Performances by Caleb James and SaveMoney now added.
Here's what you do to win the tickets: Continue reading "Contest: Win Tickets To Go See Kid Ink at Congress Theatre" »
HHRAPiNFO.COM 2011 Video Recap from HHRAPINFO on Vimeo.
Special thanks to all the event promoters who allowed us to be part of your shows. 2011 was…Read More
off Ink's "Wheels Up" Mixtape
Kid Ink teams up with Schoolboy Q and drops some westcoast heat.
Here's the highly anticipated tape from Cory Gunz entitled "Son Of A Gun". Features from Juicy J, Gudda Gudda, Mack Maine, Kid Ink, Uncle Murda,…Read More