text:
The bonuses are "only" some hundereds of million of dollars. The bank bail-out is growing to over a trillion. I am more angry that Goldman Sachs received billions of dollars from its contract with AIG when AIG was factually bankcrupt and only survived on government support. As you wrote, some people in AIG original insurance business might have done excellent work in 2008 and deserve some bonus - an argument more to break up AIG into good units and the rotten rest. The good units could pay their bonuses without public interference.
Should The AIG Bonuses Be Taken Away Or Not?
Everyone's making a huge stink about the $165 million in AIG bonuses that were recently paid out. It seems everyone is trying to figure out a way to take that money away from the people that were meant to receive them. The latest idea is to tax the bonuses at a 90% rate, which basically reduces them to nothing. Or for reference—closer to my bonus (just kidding, day job!).
But it doesn't look like it's going to happen. There are some legalities involved with taxing a specific group of people like this. As in, it's probably not cool. As a Biden economist says:
I think the president would be concerned that this bill may have some problems in going too far — the House bill may go too far in terms of some — some legal issues, constitutional validity, using the tax code to surgically punish a small group.
Why is the government looking into such drastic ways to take these people's money away? It's simple: we're all angry when we see a company that's getting bailed out paying out huge bonuses to the very people we believe put them in that mess. And we want payback.
Laying Blame
It's understandable to be upset, but is it right? Should these people have their bonuses taken away when they were contractually obligated to receive them? And if somehow they were taken away, why would these (presumably great) employees stay at the company? Why wouldn't they all take off, leaving AIG devoid of all the good talent that's left?
AIG could do several things here. They could encourage the employees to return the bonuses, or a portion of the bonus, like ING has done. Or the execs that are getting paid could volunteer to return all or a portion of the money. After all, who wants to be known as the guy who took a fat check when the company was tanking faster than ARod's reputation?
Think About It
Think about this long and hard before you answer because it brings up a very important point.
Would you return your bonus if your employer was involved in something that put it in crisis mode?
What if you had absolutely nothing to do with it though? Part of AIG's business (insurance) is a great company and does great work. What if you were an outstanding employee that brought millions of dollars of revenue to the company thanks to your hard, honest work? Would you still think about returning your bonus?
I wouldn't.
I'd keep it. I'd save it, especially these days. Or maybe I'd go to Paris for a month until it all blew over. I earned it.
My wife and I were having this conversation the other day and we couldn't agree. She felt that AIG employees shouldn't keep the bonuses—that it was unconscionable when the company is getting bailed out and tumbling faster than a 14-year-old Chinese gymnast. But when I asked if she would accept responsibility if her own company faced something similar, even if she did nothing wrong, she had to think about it.
And that's what I want people to do. Think a little bit harder about it before joining the millions of people calling for the heads of the AIG bonus babies. Not all of these people messed up. These bonuses were in their contract, so if you want to be upset then direct it at the people who wrote the contract (AIG). The law says AIG has to pay them. Taking the money away by taxing them at 90% is probably illegal, especially when it's being done simply to satisfy the angry mobs out there.
For a more detailed analysis on the AIG story, check out Michael Lewis' article about it—he's one of the few people writing about the "other side" of this story (he's also my hero, btw).
Now if you don't mind, I have to go submit my resume for a new position over at AIG: fall guy. The pay is OK but I hear the bonuses are pretty sweet.
Disclaimer: The links and mentions on this site may be affiliate links. But they do not affect the actual opinions and recommendations of the authors.
Wise Bread is a participant in the Amazon Services LLC Associates Program, an affiliate advertising program designed to provide a means for sites to earn advertising fees by advertising and linking to amazon.com.
To the legal argument:
> These bonuses were in their contract, so if you want to be upset then direct it at the people who wrote the contract (AIG). The law says AIG has to pay them.
The law says also that a bankcrupt company cannot pay bonuses without consent of the bankcruptcy judge, and AIG is in a kind of bankcruptcy, as a ward of the state. Without government billions, it would be definitely bankcrupt and there would be no money for bonuses.
> Taking the money away by taxing them at 90% is probably illegal, especially when it's being done simply to satisfy the angry mobs out there.
It's a law by congress, therefore it can be only illegal on procedural or constitutional grounds. The latter is up to the Supreme Court to decide. Any talks about "angry mobs out there" is as unimportant for legality as "greedy bankers in there", as long as the mobs are not actually outside of congress, prohibiting free deliberations. Fear of the voters, on the other hand, is no ground to dismiss a law. Payment of campaign contributions to congresspeople from banks has never been ground to dismiss a law.
To the ethics: Considering that AIG is a ward of the state, congress should feel free to decide what is best for the whole economy, not AIG executives.
Peter T. -- Being in a "kind of" bankruptcy is not the same thing as being in bankruptcy as far as the law is concerned. It is either in bankruptcy or it is not. AIG is not even in receivership -- it is therefore subject to no government oversight.
Punative taxation is unconstitutional. That's a well-settled area of law.
If instead of crafting this reactionary bailout the government would have grown a pair and attached some rules and regulations to those billions of dollars they were throwing over the side of the inaugural floats at these failing businesses, we wouldn't be in a tizzy about these bonuses right now -- they would not have been paid.
We cannot now pile more bad law on top of the bailout.
Well, I suppose anything is possible right now, huh?
I'll just say that this is yet another unwise move.
I think this "Bonusgate" is just another distraction from the bigger picture. It is also hilarious how the Democrats were trying to outdo the Republicans on their anger on this issue. Like the first commenter said, $165 million is a drop in the bucket of how much the current government is doling out. People should really be angry at the new trillion dollar toxic asset plan proposed by Obama and the treasury.
I'm glad there's someone else that pointed this out! This "bonusgate" is all smoke and mirrors to hide the truth behind the curtain.
For those unfamiliar with the toxic asset agenda, the government is going to print $1 TRILLION DOLLARS (or $1,000,000,000,000) to monetize our debts. In other words, they're printing our currency to pay off our debts with our own money! No country has ever done this successfully. In time, this will make the US dollar WORTHLESS!
If we don't take a stand, we'll be going the way of Zimbabwe or the former U.S.S.R.: paying for a loaf of bread with a wheelbarrow of money.
There is no chance in hell I'm returning the bonus if I'm in their shoes. I'm keeping it, staashing it away. If Congress wants to come after me, they can have it back, but otherwise it's my money. And I'm gonna spend it on a pony!
but it seems to me that a contractually obligated "bonus" is actually a *salary*. Why AIG doesn't just pay the people more up front is likely a tax issue, but if you sign a contract for $100 dollars and $50 of it comes at the end of the job, you expect to get your $50.
Why a "bonus" isn't tied to job performance is beyond me (and beyond my wildest salary dreams).
The public response is both predicable and pathetic. Seems we get more intense if we have a group of people to focus on and don't do so great at being "outraged" at something as nebulous as a "bailout." Then we're just complainers.
Kind of like loaning some money to a friend, then getting mad about how they spend it. Or more like, your broke sibling complaining about how they spent it.
We gave (or allowed to be given) money to AIG. They will do what they do.
Lets move on, there are other big fish to fry.
Taxing the bonuses is the wrong way to get them back, we all know that. Doesn't the Government now have a majority ownership on the board of AIG? Doesn't that mean Congress can break AIG's end of the contract?
And as much as I agree the initial bailouts were poorly done, it has nothing to do with balls. Unless you mean golden balls. Some banks spent $114 million dollars[1] lobbying congress in 2008, receiving $295 billion in federal aid. It wasn't reaction, it was reciprocation. I wish I could make investments that good.
[1]: reuters
The attempt to tax it back is called a "Bill of Attainder."
We fought a revolution, started a country, and wrote a Constitution over that among other issues. Within that document we find:
Article I, Section 9, paragraph 3 provides that: "No Bill of Attainder or ex post facto Law will be passed."
Strange that congress cannot find the same provision.
> Punative taxation is unconstitutional. That's a well-settled area of law.
Then the legal question is: Is this punitive taxation? An argument can be made that the law extends to all companies that receive bail-out moiney, not just AIG, and that any comnpany can avoid falling under the law by paying back the bail-out money (in a reasonable time). The emotions leading to the law should not play a role in this deliberation, as little as banker's campaign contributions to politicians.
Anyway, as I wrote above, the AIG money is not my big concern but the planned trillion dollar bail-out of the banks, by guaranteeing their bad assets. Congress should demand public hearings on the plan, because the guarantees and non-recourse loans amount to a public grant that only congress is allowed to make, not the Treasury and not the Fed. Speaking much more about the AIG bail-out provides a convinient cover for Geithner's new plan, which is essentially a second Hank Paulson plan of give-aways to protect their prime constituency, the financial sector. That can happen if you choose the secretary of the Treasury from bankers all the time. It's time to end that tradition.
It's always dangerous to encourage the government to change the rules after the fact--it's the sort of thing that comes back to bite you later.
What this indicates, though, is that we need a better set of rules:
- We need better rules for winding up very large financial institutions that have gone bust. Currently the rules are such that putting them into bankruptcy threatens the whole financial system, as we saw with Lehman Brothers. This prompts the government to do something that's sort of but not exactly bankruptcy, producing this sort of ambiguous situation.
- We need better rules for dealing with bonuses paid out on the basis of financial results that turn out to be wrong or misleading. (That is, the bonuses that we ought to be going after are not so much the ones being paid this year; we ought to be clawing back the bonuses paid in 2005, 2006, and 2007 when AIG and other large financial firms were being run into the ground by greedy idiots who got paid huge sums for taking gigantic bets that didn't blow up until after the bonus check cleared. If we had rules like that, the people running the company would have very different incentives when it came to betting the company.)
Having said all that, I'm kind of okay with the government changing the rules and taxing bonuses paid by firms that have been bailed out. It'll bring in a bit of extra revenue, it produces a reasonable result (people who work for firms that would be bust if it weren't for government bailouts don't get big bonuses), and it teaches people to be careful about trusting the government when large amounts of money are involved--always a good lesson.
I know the media doesn't help with this in the way they report the numbers, but AIG recieved around $170 Billion, gave "bonuses" totaling $165 Million. (which, correctly noted by Amber is actually a kind of a misnomer).
To say that correctly, it's $170,000 Million and $165 Million.
That means the bonuses actually made up a bit less than 0.1% of the bailout money. (That's 1/1000).
To understand this in numbers that makes sense to us normal folk, that's like if i bailed out your company with $170,000 and your boss paid out $165 in bonuses to you and your colleagues.
So, don't you think this reaction is entirely, gee... disproportionate? In fact, in the face of the true cost of economic recovery failure, isn't this reaction actually insanely stupid? Shouldn't we all be angry that our congressmen are wasting more than a week on trying to recover less than 1/1000 of the money sent to ONE institution, which makes up less than less than 1% of all the recovery money we're spending anyway???
AIG was upfront about the bonus structure before the bailout money was given them, and they are not bonus payments in the traditional sense of the word. They are indeed more like salary payments. Sure, the people getting these payments earn way more than most of us, but that's a dangerous game to play. If you earn twice what your neighbor does, does that mean you should have some of your salary taken away? Salary that you were counting on. This is a smokescreen, pure and simple. We're all getting fired up over this and the nation is trillions of dollars in debt. Why get so worked up over a tiny drop in the ocean?
And if we let them go bankrupt, do they get their bonuses? I guess I'm not with you here. It seems like the same kind of creative accounting that got us into this mess to start with. Not just with AIG, but with any company that can show losses yet have ceo's or others get bonuses. Maybe too big to fail is just too damn big to start with, and part of too big is being able to float all this b.s. because it's just "too complicated".
Funny how AIG wants to hid behind contractual obligations, but the automakers were forced to rescind on their contractual obligations to their union workers.
Of course the government made the mistake of not spelling out the rules before hand, so now they have to live with the consequences. Some times the appearance of impropriety is as important as whether or not any thing inappropriate actually occurred.
For example our superintendent of schools just received a a $75k bonus, a week before announcing that they are cutting back on teachers due to lack of funds. Does he have to give back that money, no. Should he? It would pay the annual salary for two teachers.
I would and I would if I was one of the AIG execs. Building goodwill towards their company is part of the function of being at the top, it helps insure that you have business next year. Part of my retirement funds is invested through AIG and I have been strongly considering pulling that money even though I would take a hit financially to do so.
What a silly argument. For all intents and purposes, AIG went bankrupt last summer. Had the government not intervened, all those "good employees," would have received no bonus... so why should they receive one now at the taxpayer's expense?
(The preceding was not a legal argument)
From a more legal standpoint, I believe the law will stand. Retroactive taxes have been Constitutionally upheld, and by wording the legislation to include any company that receives more than $5 billion in bailout money, it should apply to enough people that it is not considered a punitive tax. Harvard law professor Laurence Tribe says it should be considered Constitutional.
@Gimble: Good analogy there, that's a great point and I totally agree. Those contracts to autoworkers were what was drowning them and so they needed to be addressed.
Here's my problem: AIG is an insurance company (as the President reminded us tonight). A very good one at that. Do we know whether the executives that are getting these bonuses (some of them are returning them already) were from the profitable, insurance part of the business? If so, do they deserve to be punished like this?
I don't know, maybe I'm not being consistent, but all this outrage just doesn't make sense to me.
And by the way, I loved how President Obama answered that nonsensical question about why he didn't come out on TV to complain about the AIG bonuses right away.
"Because I like to know what I'm talking about before I speak."
The Writer's Coin | Follow me on Twitter
I love this post and kudos for writing it. My husband and I have been having the exact same disagreement.
I think it's funny how everyone thinks the receivers of these bonuses should give the money back. It's always easy to give away someone else's money isn't it? I think more people need to put themselves in the shoes of these employees, not the big CEOs, but the little worker bees at the bottom of the totem pole. I don't think many people in that same situation would honestly give away their hard earned money.
@WC Porter
"Those contracts to autoworkers were what was drowning them..."
Ummmmm. NO.
That's just GOP talking point bullshit. The actual hourly wage differential between the Big Three and foreign competition southern plants is inconsequential to the price of an auto.
Big 3 are actually cheaper in price, mostly.
The problem for Detroit is that they've been selling inferior product for decades. They completely and consistently misread the market.
Unions aren't the problem, management is.
To the bigger issue of the bonus payouts ... if I got (won) one, I wouldn't give it back. That would be stupid. But there is no reason to pay them in the first place. Yes, AIG has a contractual obligation to pay. But contracts get broken every day (see: union autoworker contracts). Contract disputes happen all the time. In fact, AIG has refused to pay their contractualy obligated bonus payments to employees for years because of performance issues. And I think we can all agree this is a huge effing performance issue.
So don't pay and let the injured parties sue. Let's all go to court and see how a jury of our peers feels about the bonus payout issue.
@One Frugal Girl
You seem to be confused about he bonus issue. Have you been paying ANY attention to this?
"I think more people need to put themselves in the shoes of these employees, not the big CEOs, but the little worker bees at the bottom of the totem pole."
Frugal G, the little worker bees aren't getting the million dollar bonus checks and the little worker bees aren't in danger of losing any "bonus" they might get.
I'd recommend a Google search perhaps, to read up on the facts. It's been covered in most every newspaper of record. http://www.google.com just in case you don't know how to do a Google search.
I'm sure that you and your hubby have been having a disagreement over this. He might actually be dealing with facts, while you are obviously confused. But then, he married you.
Theer is a resignation letter from an AIG honcho who will not be giving his million dollar bonus back, instead giving it all to charity.
>It's simple: we're all angry when we see a company that's >getting bailed out paying out huge bonuses to the very people >we believe put them in that mess.
It is simple. People who made mistakes - consciously or not - should take responsibility i.e. get fired or "punished" in some other way e.g. should get their pay docked or whatever seems appropriate. That's the basic law of the free market economy - those who make mistakes fall behind those who do not. It's not the other way out...
>Should these people have their bonuses taken away when they >were contractually obligated to receive them?
No one may be obligated to receive benefits. You may be entitled to it but as far as I know you cannot be obligated to it. The company is obligated to pay, not the CEO's to receive them, or are they ?
>And if somehow they were taken away, why would these >(presumably great) employees stay at the company? Why wouldn't >they all take off, leaving AIG devoid of all the good talent >that's left?
If those good talents got the company in a difficult situation in the first place, should they be still considered worth keeping ?
>Part of AIG's business (insurance) is a great company and does >great work.
Well made point. The company should distinguish between effective and ineffective employees. If the ineffective group is being paid large bonuses it may be branded as an action detrimental to the company's health and as such is punishable under U.S. law, isn't it (I'm not an U.S. citizen, so I don't know for sure)?
>These bonuses were in their contract, so if you want to be >upset then direct it at the people who wrote the contract
>(AIG). The law says AIG has to pay them.
Yes, the people who drafted contracts that award certain people bonuses regardless of their financial results (while managing company) are to blame.
As there is not simple answer to your question I would say that the company owners should try to question the validity of the aforementioned contracts in court. If the court determines that the contracts are invalid or faulty in some respect the owners would gain a legal argument in the dispute and a legal basis for taking another legal action in order to take away the bonuses from people who didn't deserve them.
Another question is how the U.S. government secured it's aid. When providing money for a company to bail it out, it should state some conditions regarding inteded use of this money, right ?
@Bucky You don't think those legacy costs had anything to do with the Big three failing? Come on, giving in to those kinds of terms is crazy.
But back to the subject at hand, let me make one thing perfectly clear: of course I believe that the ones who caused this problem shouldn't get bonuses. But the whole point is that AIG is a great insurance company. Those great employees that had nothing to do with the derivative side of things shouldn't be punished.
Or should they because their company is in trouble and did bad things? If I was a top dog at AIG's insurance dept. I would take my bonus and definitely not give it back. I earned it.
As for the ones giving it back, we'll never know if they were the "good," "the bad," or "the really bad."
The Writer's Coin | Follow me on Twitter
All of these big banks are having the same issues, new executive office suites, new planes, big bonuses. No business that fails so horribly that the govt. has to come in and rescue them should be purchasing new assets or paying bonuses. AIG could and should have renegotiated those contracts just like the auto makers did theirs. Yes, AIG isn't the only one doing this. The others we bailed out have been doing the exact same thing but just didn't get the media attention. There is way too much nepotism between these big banks, the fed and Congress. A blanket policy stopping the excesses needs to be there, trying to go back and tax it was more stupidity.
You know what makes me mad about the bonus situation? I worked for a Fortune 500 company during a time when they made record breaking profits. It was $11 billion in one year, if I'm not mistaken, and I was part of the team of "foot soldiers" that helped them make those profits. The employment contract read that bonuses would be paid "as business conditions permit." What actually happened was that management got bonuses and the little guys like me got coffee table books. We have a really sick corporate culture in this country. I actually heard an AIG representative refer to the people receiving bonuses as "talent" and he insisted that the bonuses were necessary to "retain" the talent before they get hired away. (Presumably, there are other global insurance companies on other planets whose economies have not been destroyed that are eager for this kind of "talent.")
As long as we insist on believing that corporate execs are supermen and -women with extraordinary powers, they will continue to be paid obscene salaries. We all need to GET OUR HEADS back and let it be known that if a senior-senior-senior vice president is at the helm of the ship when it sinks, NO, he does not get a big bonus while he is riding the coast guard helicopter to shore. It is QED a proved fact that these people did NOT do "excellent" work last year because they contributed to a crash of the world economy. Each and every one of those "talented" execs could be replaced by at least ten other people who could do the job just as well and are currently working in banks and accounting firms for sane salaries.
To answer the question, hell yes I would give the bonus back, even if I felt i was not directly to blame for the company's problems. It is ridiculous and shameful to accept such a large bonus at a time when people are living in their cars because of my company's actions. And remember, these guys are rich already. It's not as if they are choosing to give up shoes for their children. They might have to sell that fourth vacation home, but they'll be okay. Should the government take that money back? Sure. If they can. AIG is basically owned by the government, now, so why not?
Catherine Shaffer
Wise Bread Contributor
My understanding is that the bonuses are being paid to the derivatives' traders (who may already have annual salaries of $500k+) not the insurance folks, and that internal obligations were being honored but not external commitments (which were critical to sustaining the global financial system).
Legacy costs are a part of the Big Three's problems, it's true.
And they have legacy costs because, you know, they've had a very successful business here for many, many decades. All those foreign companies don't have legacy costs -- yet -- because they are relatively new to the US market.
But the legacy costs are a problem now only because the Big Three decided that instead of setting aside some the money they made decades ago when times were good to pay for future contractual obligations to their workers, they'd rather give big fat bonus checks to the executives and dividends to the shareholders.
In fact, major corporations like the Big Three spent many millions to buy legislation from congress that made it legal to steal from retirement accounts.
So boo-fucking-hoo for their complaints about legacy costs. They have legacy costs because they were very successful for most of the last century.
You also wrote: "If I was a top dog at AIG's insurance dept. I would take my bonus and definitely not give it back. I earned it."
For the record, there isn't a single executive at any major corporation in American that has "earned" the millions of dollars they make. Not saying they don't work hard, but just that they are vastly overvalued for their efforts. Their ratio of compensation to contribution is way out of whack.
Here is one AIG's letter of resignation that was published in the New York Times yesterday. Worth a look as he addresses some of the stuff that we're all commenting about.
The Writer's Coin | Follow me on Twitter
Catherine (#27) is right. Corporate culture in the U.S. is totally f-ed up. It's a delusion of grandeur for a Chief Officer of a company to think he/she deserves compensation equivalent to $5,000-10,000 *per hour* -- even if times are *good*. That kind of income is made only on the backs of the hundreds or thousands of people who are doing real work in the organization.
Yet we tolerate companies which keep overpaying their officers while they lay off people who've spent 20-30 years at the company. We seek out to hire executives (*cough* Bob Nardelli *cough*) who ran their companies down and still left with millions. We believe it when we're told that this kind of pay is necessary because otherwise the organization won't be able to keep that kind of talent. Look around -- how many jobs are there which would pay $5,000 an hour? Especially to lose buckets of money and capital? Damn few, I'll bet. So where are these hot shots going to go? Strange how the officers at huge companies like Toyota and Sony and Nokia and Bosch, with headquarters outside the U.S., don't stand up on pedestals and proclaim that they won't work until they're paid what Vikram Pandit and Carly Fiorina have been paid.
And it's ironic that these same "heads-I-win-tails-I-win" clowns have convinced American workers that "pay for performance" is the only fair way to compensate people.
They're fools, but we're chumps for going along with this nonsense.
Totally with the "pay for performance" thing. After all, it's what we non-execs manage with, right? If one of us f***ed up that bad, a bonus would be out of the question. We'd be lucky if we still had a job, and a second chance to do better.
So I say, if it's good enough for us, it's good enough for them. The unit(s) that tanked the company, and pretty near took the economy with it, should go. The 'contractual bonuses' come into play only as long as they're still at the company. So fire their incompetent asses.
Why would you pay a bonus to 'retain' such 'skilled, knowledgeable, results-getting' asswipes? They failed. Epically. Let them go, maybe then you can hire someone who might be able to do the job.....
Totally agree that compensation is messed up. The problem? Corporate boards aren't doing their job, they're just taking their easy paycheck and OKing everything that came across their desk.
The Writer's Coin | Follow me on Twitter
Kind of beside the point of these bonuses in particular, but the fact is that Incentive plans always go awry. As soon as you tie your bonus to a metric that's supposed to measure performance you're going to get people doing the wrong thing--in particular, doing whatever it takes to get the bonus instead of what needs to be done.
Incentive plans always go bad because they aren't set up properly. It's like giving your kids some money for bringing home good grades. They might cheat to get those grades, and that means you've picked the wrong thing to incentivize.
But if these systems were set up properly—then it might work. It's tough to incentivize something that employees/your kids might game you on, but it's possible.
The Writer's Coin | Follow me on Twitter
I don't understand your main argument that the bonuses are ok if they were given to employees in profitable areas of the company.
Last time I checked, a company's profit and share price were the sum total of all the parts of the company. If the company is bankrupt then everyone suffers - there is no credit given for your work at that point.
If a player on the World Series losing team had a great series - do they still win a bit of the championship?
@Four Pillars
I like the World Series analogy, but I think it's a little bit flawed. Let's say a player has a contract to make $3 million dollars this year but the team has a horrible season and they wind up in last place, forcing the owner to go into debt to pay the salaries. Should the player give that money up?
An even better analogy is the one I was discussing with my wife: let's say you had a clause in your contract at work that said if you achieved this impossible goal, you'd be rewarded. And you work your tail off for a year or more and manage to achieve it. Great job! But then word comes down that Bob over in the other building messed up. Big time. So the company is still going to pay you your bonus. Would you feel compelled to give it back? And to go even further, how would you feel about the government forcing you to return the money?
I'd love to hear your feelings on that scenario.
The Writer's Coin | Follow me on Twitter


text:
Market News
|June 10, 2013
Agri-giants trying to solve bee deaths.
|One of every three bites of food we consume depends on pollination by honeybees, but these overlooked contributors to our food system are continuing to die in stubbornly perplexing ways.
Beekeeping groups have held exhaustive conferences. Researchers have organized task forces. The U.S. Department of Agriculture has contributed some of its stretched resources to tracking down the cause of the mysterious deaths, and in a report issued last month, delivered a frustratingly complex answer: Many factors may be responsible, from stress to pesticides.
Now agricultural and chemical heavyweights are getting into the mix. Monsanto Co., which two years ago bought an Israeli bee research company, hosts an industry conference on bee health at its headquarters in Creve Coeur this month. Bayer CropScience is building a 5,500-square-foot "bee health center" in North Carolina, and with fellow chemical giant, Syngenta, has developed a "comprehensive action plan" for bee health.
"The beekeeping industry has always crawled on its hands and knees to USDA and universities, begging for help," said Jerry Hayes, a bee industry veteran recently hired by Monsanto to run its bee research efforts. "Now we have this very large company involved that knows how important bees are to agriculture."
And to the bottom line. Bees pollinate up to $20 billion in American agricultural crops, a number that gets the attention of the industry. Monsanto, for one, owns Seminis, the country's largest fruit and vegetable seed producer --- and many of those seeds depend on bees. Beyond that, Monsanto and its rivals have a financial interest in developing a marketable cure that has so far remained elusive.
But as researchers, and now the private sector, puzzle over the issue, some scientists and environmental groups are pointing to a major culprit: The very companies working for solutions, they contend, are a main cause of bee deaths in the first place.
In 2006, beekeepers started noticing that bees were abandoning their hives, a phenomenon scientists dubbed Colony Collapse Disorder. Since then, the American bee population has dropped by an average of 30 percent every year, sending researchers, beekeepers and farmers into a head-scratching frenzy to figure out the cause.
Specifically and somewhat narrowly, the disorder is being blamed on mites and viruses. More broadly, researchers say, it's a symptom of an agricultural system that relies too heavily on chemicals and monocultures, including the vast swaths of corn and soybeans in the Midwest.
While bees, historically, have not foraged on these crops for food, the widespread presence of single crops means fewer dining options for the bees --- and that could be leading to weakened immune systems.
"We have been systematically eliminating flowers that bees require for nutrition and survival," explained Marla Spivak, a University of Minnesota entomologist and one of the country's most prominent bee researchers. "We started using lots of insecticides, necessary because monoculture put out feasts for crop pests. Insecticides are designed to kill insects, which depending on the dose can also kill bees."
The finger, increasingly, is getting pointed at a particular class of insecticides, called neonicotinoids, that have become widely used over the last decade, largely because they are thought to be less toxic to mammals. These neonicotinoids, manufactured by Bayer and Syngenta, are used as seed coatings on most of the corn and soybeans planted in the U.S. Most corn and soybean crops grown here contain genetically engineered traits developed by Monsanto --- although there is no established link between those traits and bee health.
Some recent studies suggest neonicotinoids --- by some estimates the most widely used insecticides in the world --- are highly toxic to bees.
Published last year, a study by Purdue University found that dead bees that had foraged in and around corn fields contained high levels of neonicotinoid compounds. The study was prompted by massive bee die-offs that happened in the spring, when corn planters were spewing neonicotinoid-containing dust.
"I know, definitively, that there's a relationship between treated seed and spring die-offs," said Christian Krupke, the study's lead author. "It (neonicotinoids) blows out behind the planter and gets in the air, it lands on dandelions. It lands on the bees, even."
While Krupke says there's no direct link between neonicotinoids and Colony Collapse Disorder, he said, "anything that's a stressor to bees is a concern now. We know they're weaker because of it."
The industry, however, flatly denies any link between bee health and the neonicotinoids it produces.
"There's no scientific evidence linking neonics with bee health --- period," said Dave Fischer, director of environmental toxicity and risk assessment at Bayer CropScience.
Bayer, he explained, relies heavily on bees for pollination, particularly in its canola fields in Canada, where it brings in 70,000 hives a year to pollinate fields.
"It would be a poor business model if we were poisoning the bees we depend on," he noted.
The debate over neonicotinoids is likely to get more heated, particularly in the wake of a two-year European Union ban on the compounds, announced on April 29. The vote on the matter was split --- with 15 of the 27 EU members voting for the ban.
"It's a controversial subject," said Gene E. Robinson, director of the Bee Research Facility at the University of Illinois. "Not all studies agree with each other. It's a subject that bears more scrutiny."
It's also one that some researchers think is almost unnecessary.
While the industry claims the use of neonicotinoids on seeds boosts yields by 6 to 12 bushels an acre, many question that.
Krupke has done side-by-side field trials to determine whether the seed treatments improve yield. "We have not found any difference in yield or root damage --- nothing," he said. "It doesn't mean it never works. But it means we certainly don't need to be putting it on every kernel of corn."
Environmental groups agree, and have called for an EU-style mindset until links are more solidly studied.
"Any kind of reasonably cautious approach --- given the severity of the problem --- would dictate that we should act sooner rather than later," said Doug Gurian-Sherman, of the Union of Concerned Scientists, a Washington-based science advocacy group. "And that would be a moratorium on these insecticides, especially since we know they have such negligible impacts on yield."
Neal Bergman remembers a seven-year stretch in the 2000s when crop planes doused cotton fields in the Missouri Bootheel with the insecticide malathion.
"They sprayed 400,000 acres of cotton every week," he said. "It didn't matter how the wind was blowing or what time of day it was. They sprayed over people, over animals, over beehives --- everything."
For Bergman, who operates the state's largest bee operation, it was the dousing of beehives, naturally, that worried him most. He says his bee population plummeted, costing him $1 million and almost putting him out of business.
Since then, he's been wary --- and working hard to keep his bees alive. He uses several medicines and gives his hives protein supplements.
"I don't think the pollen they get is as good anymore," Bergman said. "And that's where they get their protein."
Bergman, echoing many beekeepers, says more coordination is required among farmers so they don't spray chemicals when the bees are foraging a particular crop. The labels on the chemicals say that farmers shouldn't apply them when bees are present --- but some don't pay attention, and enforcement is lax.
Human behavior, he says, can have a major impact.
Indeed, more hobbyist beekeepers in urban and suburban areas have started keeping bees in the hope that they can contribute to a solution.
Robert Sears, president of the Eastern Missouri Beekeepers Association, says he thinks that there's a greater awareness of the problem, and that beekeepers are learning to maintain healthy hives with a multi-pronged approach, using medicines and good hive management techniques.
"I think the best practices are moving in the direction of using soft chemicals and organic treatments," he said. "There are also mechanical ways to manipulate hives that don't involve chemicals."
But time, many worry, is getting short.
"These are little creatures, working behind the scenes," Robinson said. "You don't know about them until they're gone."

subset: commoncrawl


text:
Are you excited for the big game on Sunday? Judging from all of your posts, tweets and mentions on our Facebook page, you're ready to nosh on some tasty comfort food (corn chowder, pulled pork sandwiches, pizza) as well as dive into some classic party foods (salsa and chips; veggies and dip; cheese and crackers).
We asked our fans for their healthier Super Bowl tips and you did not disappoint! From Eggplant Fries to Parmesan Popcorn, our customers have the best ideas!
MaryAnn Jones, from Manhasset, Long Island, NY says, for her, "The keys to Thriving during a snack-a-licious party are balance & control." She likes to eat a satisfying snack like a handful of almonds or walnuts before the big game….


text:
In 2000, Newell Rubbermaid purchased the Gillette portfolio of writing products which included Parker, Waterman, Paper Mate and the Liquid Paper brands. They are now the global leader in writing instruments also owning brands such as Sharpie who are the number one brand of writing instruments in the United States. Newell Rubbermaid now produce just 47 writing instruments as part of the Waterman range with approximately the same number of products in each of three categories; fountain pens, ball point pens and roller ball pens.
Waterman is recognised as the oldest manufacturer of fountain pens, still in existence today, 130 years after Lewis Waterman received his first patent following the loss of that vital business contract. From the humble beginnings of one salesman fashioning a reliable pen feed from a wagon wheel spoke in a country farm in the 1880s to a prominent position in the portfolio of the global leader in the writing instrument, the enduring tale of Waterman is one of triumph over adversity and dogged determination to produce a superior writing instrument.
Waterman Classic Fountain Pens Currently Available .............
Currently no products available.


text:
Abstract and Keywords
Agenda setting describes the process through which issues are selected for consideration by a decision-making body. Among the myriad of issues policymakers can consider, few are more vexing than natural hazards. By aggregating (or threatening to aggregate) death, destruction, and economic loss, natural hazards represent a serious and persistent threat to public safety. While citizens rightfully expect policymakers to protect them, many of the policy challenges associated natural hazards fail to reach the crowded government agenda. This article reviews the literature on agenda setting and natural hazards, including the strain between preparing for emerging hazards, on the one hand, and responding to existing disasters, on the other hand. It considers the extent to which natural hazards pose distinctive difficulties during the agenda-setting process, focusing specifically on the dynamics of issue identification, problem definition, venue shopping, and interest group mobilization in natural hazard domains. It closes by suggesting a number of future avenues of agenda-setting research.
Keywords: agenda setting, policy change, natural hazards, emergency management, preparedness, relief
Access to the complete content on Oxford Research Encyclopedia of Natural Hazard Science requires a subscription or purchase. Public users are able to search the site and view the abstracts and keywords for each book and chapter without a subscription.
Please subscribe or login to access full text content.
If you have purchased a print title that contains an access token, please see the token for information about how to register your code.
For questions on access or troubleshooting, please check our FAQs, and if you can''t find the answer there, please contact us.


text:
Movable Parts DVD
Viewer Comments
Wow & Wow!! I love Week of Webisodes, I love the DVD, and of course, I love all the goodies shown today - have my shopping list started! Thanks for showing all these great projects. Happy New Year!
Wonderful ideas a can't wait till tomorrow. A great way to start the new year!
I love this webisode.Can't wait for the next one.
As usual, you two light the creative fire within me. Great cards by Teresa! Such super ideas!
An entire week of webisodes, Yay! What a wonderful week it will be! Thank you so very much for sharing all the new goodies, as well as all the expertise. And I STILL want to be Teresa when I grow up!
Thanks for the videos, look forward to them every week.
I think the Lemonade Stand paper would be perfect for paper piecing the Sew Sweet pin cushion Small Stamps
I agree, what a way to start off the new year! Thank you for all the amazing new products, techniques, and fun!! Happy New Year, ladies. Love the webisodes.
Im SOOOOOO excited, not only for the new week of webisodes but I subscribed to the RSS feed (located on right side of screen) and now my webisode plays without interuption, YEA!
First time EVER and thank you for caring by emailing me when I wrote you. I figured it out but you did answer me and I appreciate that.
Easy to see how wonderful these would be for gifting
Love the 1st webisode for 2013! Really loved the extra tips Gail shared in the webisode, super helpful. Have you thought of doing a webisode that just focuses on the mechanics of tips and tricks for folding, scoring, cutting, when and where to put on brads, how to cut out and apply dazzles both the innies and main dazzles, all the mechanics how to make cards look as finished as the ones PW staff make?
Reply from Paper Wishes Customer Service:
We're glad you loved the webisode. New ideas are always welcome and webisode plans are always in development. Thank you for the suggestion! Happy creating!
It is hard to tell what the finished size the cards are. Can they be made as A2 cards?
Reply from Paper Wishes Customer Service:
On the DVD it tells you what size the finished card is. And yes you can always scale them to be the A2 size. Thanks for asking.
This DVD sounds fantastic - is there any chance you can offer it as a downloadable purchase for those of us who are overseas and have to pay high postage charges? Pretty please?!
Reply from Paper Wishes Customer Service:
There are no plans to add the DVD as a download at this time. Anything is possible for future creative adventures, though!
I LOVE webisodes!!! Thank you so much for these creative ideas! You all are amazing!
I am so addicted to Paper Wishes/Hot Off the Press! I think my hobby is collecting supplies as I buy everything you show!! I love your products and enjoy watching the Webisodes. Gail, you are so talented and an asset to Paper Wishes. Keep up the good work and I will continue watching and buying!!! Happy New Year to each of you.
Great new papers and dazzles.
I am trying to find the "Simply ann" videos. I waatched 2 of them but now I can't find them or any new ones. Where do I search for them???
Reply from Paper Wishes Customer Service:
Ann's blog link is here. New updates show as she has new projects to reveal. http://simplyann.paperwishes.com/ Happy Creating!
first buy can not wait to get the DVD and start creating.
I absolutely love your webisodes! You make them so inviting!!!
Paper Wishes Weekly Webisodes feature free scrapbooking video classes and card making video classes! Every week Paulette and LeNae bring you new online scrapbooking or card making classes demonstrating the very latest paper craft and scrapbooking techniques. Each of our free card making and scrapbooking classes also gives you unique project ideas and tips from Paper Wishes' Design Team. Come back often so you don't miss any of the fun in our card making and scrapbooking classes! You are sure to be inspired! Also watch for our "Week of Webisodes" events where we feature new scrapbooking video classes daily!


text:
Burks 10GA4-1-1/2-ME Centrifugal Pump, Close Coupled, 60 Hz, Single Phase, 3500 RPM, 1 Horsepower, ODP Motor Enclosure, Frame Size 56J, 41 lbs.
Burks 10GA4-1-1/2-ME Centrifugal Pump, Close Coupled, 60 Hz, Single Phase, 3500 RPM, 1 Horsepower, ODP Motor Enclosure, Frame Size 56J, 41 lbs.
|Adapter Material
|Cast Iron
|Capacities (GPM)
|Casing Material
|Cast Iron
|Casing Working Pressure
|Discharge NPT (Inches)
|1 1/2
|Heads To (Feet)
|Impeller Material
|Impeller Size (Inches)
|3.75" (3 3/4")
|Inlet Pressure (PSI)
|Bronze Fitted
|Maximum Operating Temperature
|Motor Enclosure Type
|ODP - Open Drip Proof
|Motor Frame Size
|Motor Shaft Material
|303 Stainless Steel
|1 Ph (Single Phase)
|Shaft Seal Material
|Speed (RPM)
|Suction NPT (Inches)
|General Description
|Burks GA4 Series - Centrifugal Pump, Close Coupled, End Suction
|Materials of Construction
|Adapter - All Iron: Cast Iron, Bronze Fitted: Cast Iron, All Bronze: Bronze.
Casing - All Iron: Cast Iron, Bronze Fitted: Cast Iron, All Bronze: Bronze.
Impeller - All Iron: Cast Iron, Bronze Fitted: Bronze, All Bronze: Bronze.
Shaft: #303 Stainless Steel.
Shaft Seal: Carbon Ceramic SS Buna-N
|Standard pump motors are of open drip proof (ODP) construction and are rated with jet pump service factors for continuous duty operation. Motors are 56 frame size with NEMA standard mounting fl ange, one piece threaded stainless steel shaft and ball/ball bearing construction.
|Four Position Casing
|Discharge can be located in any of four positions. Casing is close grain iron of 30,000 psi minimum tensile strength. Back pull-out design eliminates the need to disturb piping should the pump ever require service - the casing stays in the line.
|Enclosed Cast Iron Impeller
|Of the latest hydraulic design for maximum efficiency, impeller is balanced for vibration-free operation and threaded onto stainless steel motor shaft. Impeller is available in bronze.
|Mechanical Shaft Seal Information
|Standard self-adjusting shaft seal for temperatures to 225°F (107°C) and pressures to 150 psi (1034 kpa). Ceramic seat and carbon seal face for long trouble-free service. Special seals are available for higher temperatures and fl uids other than water.
|Factory Tested
|After careful assembly and inspection, EVERY pump is factory tested and meets Hydraulic Institute standards.
|Motor Information
|60 Hz - 3450 RPM - ODP
Single Phase: 1/3 thru 2 HP - 115/230 Volt, 3 HP - 230 Volt Only
Three Phase: 1/3 thru 3 HP - 208-230/460 Volt
50 Hz - 2900 RPM - ODP
Single Phase: 110/220 Volt
Three Phase: 380 Volt
|Overload Protection
|All single phase ODP and Totally Enclosed motors have built-in overload protection. All three phase motors and all explosion proof motors must be installed with a magnetic starter which provides full 3-leg protection. Failure to use correct starter and overloads will void motor warranty.
Chillers / Hot Water Systems4553 products
Cooling Tower5348 products
General Water Services4553 products
HVAC4553 products
Industrial Processes5132 products
Municipal Drinking Water4553 products
Sprinkler / Irrigation5132 products
Centrifugal5132 products
Close Coupled4738 products
End Suction4263 products
You need to sign in to add a review.
|Part No
Stay tuned for releases of new product reviews and videos on our YouTube channel!
Check our Social Media for new product announcements and exclusive specials for our followers.


text:
I miss Bernie the Bernina, oh yes, so I have to make sure I have some form of crafty activity with me when I go away. The yarn and the hook are obviously the perfect portable choice. (Takes a while to decide which yarn and which colours to take though!)
As you may just have noticed from reading the blog this week, we spent the whole of last week in Yorkshire. As we unpacked the car and I started to put away a few bits and pieces in the kitchen, I looked round for a fruit bowl. Mr HH my dear, have you seen a fruit bowl? Negative. It was only some while later that we realised the fruit bowl was on the dining table, through in the living room. By then, the bananas and clementines were happy elsewhere and I, meanwhile, was very happy to find an empty bowl...
Most evenings while we were away, as we pretty well stuffed our face most lunchtimes, I didn't need to cook a full dinner later on, leaving me with more time on my hands than is usual at home. I crocheted away all night and I crocheted pretty much everywhere else too, when I wasn't driving!
The result (or half of it, to be precise) was this...
Looking at it, I couldn't help thinking what a marvellous rug it would have made for my Sindy house many moons ago, I could have trimmed all the edges to look like tassels!
And of course, there was the tin of buttons purchased in Malton which I told you about the other day. The crochet "rug" really needed the buttons.
Because like the lovely Lucy, I too had spotted those fabby wrist warmers in the Joules catalogue and thought they would be just the ticket for my arthritic wrists. And so the yarn came to Yorkshire and I must say, the wristies came in quite handy against the chill up there (I am an adopted softy Southerner now, after all).
That's my pair up there. Perfect for driving in, sleeping in (cold hands sticking out of bed!), crafting in and doing all manner of things in.
Perfect for whatever you fancy.
It didn't end there. In true Hen style, I didn't (couldn't) stop at one pair. Oh no. I had the proverbial wristy bug. It started with 34 chain and on it went...
And I was loving the stripes. Mainly half trebles, some doubles, some two rows of half trebles in the same colour, some a half treble and a double together in the same colour. Just to make it all a bit...interesting. Round the top, I opted for a simple picot edging, chain three and slip stitch in the next stitch, all the way round the top.
But why stop at plain stripes? Why disregard wiggly stripes? Why not ripple wristies?? Why not indeed.
For those I chained 31 + 2, the pattern worked in trebles, groups of three trebles in fact, then decreasing and increasing in groups of three in between , as you do with the ravishing ripple.
There you have it, three pairs of wonderful wristies to show for my yummy Yorkshire trip.
Hmm, these are fabulous to play with!
I had fun choosing buttons from my thrifty tin, matching up pairs because in that whole tin, there were very few pairs indeed.
And now my first pair is looking a tad fluffy and well-loved already. But I have the ripply ones in reserve for when I'm feeling kinky rather than straight, so to speak. The third pair? Well, they were intended for a special friend and if you read her blog you just might spot them!
Happy weekend one and all. Until next week...


text:
Deploy KACE products in fewer than two weeks.
Achieve rapid return on your IT investment.
Manage, secure, and service all of your network-connected devices with the KACE Systems Management Appliance (SMA). Inventory all hardware and software, painlessly patch mission-critical applications and operating systems, and assure software license compliance.
The KACE SMA offers more hardware and software asset management capabilities across more platforms than its primary competitors.*
Accelerate the initial provisioning and ongoing administration of system images and driver updates with the KACE Systems Deployment Appliance (SDA). This easy-to-use, OS-agnostic systems provisioning appliance ensures your connected systems remain up to date and secure.
Dramatically streamline image deployment with the KACE SDA's multicasting capabilities.
Identify and manage the mobile devices on your network with this cloud-based solution.
KACE is the fastest-to-implement, easiest-to-use, and most comprehensive family of solutions that fulfills the endpoint systems management needs of growing organizations.
See our products in action before you buy.
Register for on-demand demos and online presentations.
Explore the benefits of our technologies through white papers, case studies and more.
Browse our collection of videos featuring customer stories and educational content.


text:
Finance & Business Services
Division Summary
Financial Manager - Kellie Fritze 474-6005 firstname.lastname@example.com
The Division of Finance and Business Services currently oversees an operating budget in excess of $40 million. This division is charged with developing and tracking the annual budgets of sixteen craft and trade shops as well as support departments. The financial responsibilities include purchasing, account payable, payroll, account reconciliation, management reporting and capital project tracking.
The Division of Finance & Business Services includes:
Phone: 907=474-6005
Fax: 907-474-5656
Mailing Address: PO Box 757380 ~ Fairbanks, Alaska 99775-7380
Physical Address: 803 Alumni Drive ~ Fairbanks, Alaska 99775
Finance & Business Staff Directory


text:
San Francisco, CA (PRWEB) May 10, 2013
The University of California, San Francisco's (UCSF) Academic Senate Coordinating Committee, the School of Pharmacy Faculty Council, and the School of Medicine Faculty Council unanimously approved a resolution in April to phase out the procurement of meat and poultry raised with non-therapeutic antibiotics at UCSF. The resolution also encourages all University of California campuses to do the same.
"There is overwhelming scientific consensus that overuse of antibiotics in livestock is a health hazard to people. It's time for hospitals, universities, and other consumers to stop buying meat raised with non-therapeutic antibiotics," said Dr. Thomas Newman, the Chair of the Sustainability Task Force at UCSF that originally spearheaded the resolution, and a member of the faculty at the School of Medicine at UCSF. Dr. Newman also sits on the Board of the San Francisco Bay Area Physicians for Social Responsibility (SF-PSR) which assisted in drafting the resolution. SF-PSR coordinates Health Care Without Harm's Healthy Food in Health Care program in California.
Eighty percent of the antibiotics sold in the United States are used in animal agriculture, primarily for non-therapeutic purposes. These antibiotics are being used for growth promotion and to compensate for unsanitary living conditions. There is strong consensus among independent experts that overuse of these medically important drugs in animal agriculture contributes to growing antibiotic resistance. The European Union banned the use of non-therapeutic antibiotics in livestock production in 2006. More than 300 organizations, including the American Medical Association, the American Public Health Association, and Health Care Without Harm, have advocated ending the practice here in the U.S.
"We believe that healthcare is best positioned to lead our society away from its addiction to antibiotics in animal agriculture," said Gary Cohen, President of Health Care Without Harm. "Hospitals have both the mission-critical rationale and the economic clout to transform the animal supply chain to become more environmentally sustainable and healthier for everyone." Health Care Without Harm currently works with over 93 hospitals across the country that are reducing the amount of meat they serve in their facilities, and/or are procuring more sustainable meat.
With the finalization of UCSF's resolution, the University's Nutrition and Food Services, which prepares and serves over 650,000 meals per year to patients, staff and the community, is searching for more affordable, sustainably-grown meat products. According to Jack Henderson, Associate Director of Nutrition and Food Services at UCSF, who provided input on the UCSF resolution. "At UCSF Medical Center, we are taking a two-pronged approach. First, we have reduced the amount of red meat being served overall; and secondly, we are now actively pursuing a source of beef that is grass-fed, raised without non-therapeutic antibiotics and still fits within our budget. It is a complex manoeuver involving the producer and our distributor but we believe it is a positive move. It is the right thing to do for our patients, our staff and our visitors."
However, many challenges, including cost and distribution, have to be addressed before UCSF can ensure that 100 percent of its meat is raised without non-therapeutic antibiotics. UCSF's Nutrition and Food Services and Health Care Without Harm are planning a Fall event with meat producers, distributors, and hospitals to discuss these and related issues.
For more information about how health care facilities and professionals are addressing the use of antibiotics in animal agriculture, please join us for two webinars on May 16 and 22, sponsored by Health Care Without Harm and the Pew Campaign on Human Health and Industrial Farming. The webinar on May 16 will feature a presentation by Dr. Thomas Newman and highlight how hundreds of clinicians across the country are pressuring the Food and Drug Administration for better oversight on antibiotics use. The webinar on May 22 will highlight what hospitals are already doing to procure more sustainable meat. Registration is available online.
Health Care Without Harm is an international coalition of more than 520 organizations in 53 countries, working to transform the health care industry worldwide, without compromising patient safety or care, so that it is ecologically sustainable and no longer a source of harm to public health and the environment. For more information on HCWH, see http://www.noharm.org. HCWH's Healthy Food in Health Care (HFHC) Program works with hospitals across the country to help improve the sustainability of their food services. To learn more about HCWH's Healthy Food in Health Care Program visit http://www.healthyfoodinhealthcare.org.
Read the full story at http://www.prweb.com/releases/2013/5/prweb10723085.htm


text:
(click to enlarge)
Thursday, February 25, 2010
Department of Contradiction
15 comments:
- TheLittleFlower said...
Wow.....Um....Just Wow.....I wish I could say that I've never seen something like that before. But, of course, I would be lying. Amazing contradiction.
- February 25, 2010 at 8:05 AM
- StorytellERdoc said...
LOL..."yeah, I'm allergic to allergy medication"...that's a smile that's hard to suppress! Funny stuff..thanks.
- February 25, 2010 at 8:37 AM
Sounds like one of my dictations while I'm reading throught the 75 sheets of old records and notes: medications "none"... ah, ok, hmmmm, ah, Fukitol, Gorillacillin, two white pills, and one oval pink one.
- February 25, 2010 at 10:08 AM
- ERP said...
I remember a patient chart that said:
Surgical History: Negative, Appendectomy, TAH.
Duhr. Proofread your notes!
- February 25, 2010 at 10:53 AM
Easier to keep dictating than push the rewind button.
- February 25, 2010 at 12:22 PM
I bet it means that there are no meds prescribed for specific times, every day, year-round; but she takes two allergy meds whenever she decides she needs them.
I've been in the position of having to figure out what meds to give someone (or to take myself) on the basis of statements like that before.
- February 25, 2010 at 12:22 PM
- terri c said...
I see this stuff all the time in our EMR. Someone has created templates with the most common stuff, I think, and no one READS that, just appends, so you get "well appearing cachectic chronically ill appearing male..." And for successive progress notes from the same provider group you get the ENTIRE FREAKING previous note with maybe 5 or 10 new words which you won't notice unless you read every.single.word!!! And they say the EMR is less error prone...
- February 25, 2010 at 2:08 PM
Do I contradict myself? Very well, then I contradict myself, I am large, I contain multitudes.
-Walt Whitman, Song of Myself
- February 25, 2010 at 4:33 PM
prescribed- 0 otc-2
- February 25, 2010 at 6:27 PM
My all time favorite dictation error was surgical history: Vaginal hysterectomy with excision of wisdom teeth.
I bet her husband was happy they got those outta there. And those are hellaciously impacted wisdom teeth.
- February 26, 2010 at 12:18 AM
There is a high-quality oil filter that is marketed for cars, but used by lots of motorcyclists. Recently, the manufacturer put a statement on its web site saying that its mediocre-quality filter marketed for motorcycles was the only one that should be used for motorcycles, as the high-quality filter was designed for vehicles, not motorcycles.
- February 26, 2010 at 1:11 AM
At one time in my life, I worked in a medical office. I saw stuff like this ALL TIME in files. It was in Alabama, which could explain a lot.
Totally not on the subject, but working in that office is where I came across the surname Dick. I saw it, and I starting laughing. I couldn't stop. I was 21 at the time, and yet, I felt like I hadn't left grade school. Someone has a last name that is Dick. hehehehehe
- February 26, 2010 at 6:47 AM
Ha, what a way to market mediocre-quality filters. It's a tactic that's probably been used before!
- February 26, 2010 at 10:59 AM
Transcriptionist should have caught that. Unless, of course, told to transcribe "verbatim, no matter what." You get what you wish for, I guess!
- February 26, 2010 at 11:16 AM
Awww we all know that allergy medicines aren't REAL medicines.... *insert rolling of eyes here*
- February 28, 2010 at 6:30 AM


text:
Andretti Autosport to test teen Jarrett Andretti
Andretti Autosport said Friday it will test third-generation driver Jarett Andretti in a USF2000 car at Putnam Park Raceway.
The test is scheduled for next Wednesday at the track located in Greencastle, Ind.
Andretti is a 19-year-old is a student at NC State and began racing two years ago in go-karts. He is the son of John Andretti, and the grandson of Aldo Andretti.
Aldo Andretti is the twin brother of Mario Andretti.
Andretti will be joined at the test by current Star Mazda driver Zach Veach, who will be in an Indy Lights car. It will be Veach's second test in that car.
Shelby Blackstock will test a Star Mazda car the same day for Andretti Autosport. It will be his first time in that car.


text:
THE SQL Server Blog Spot on the Web
This blog has moved! You can find this content at the following new location:
If you would like to receive an email when updates are made to this post, please register here
Subscribe to this post's comments using
One of the problems with tests of this massive scale is that they invariably can't accommodate the fact that you can give a correct answer, but the answer is not what is expected by the exam designer. Bad news is that too many questions seem to fall into the category of having multiple valid answers. To pass an exam, you need to play the game of guessing the original intent of the exam designer.
If a significant portion of your job is a SQL Server trainer, these exams have value because (1) your students may plan to take them and it's good for you to have some experience with them, and (2) they help 'formalize' the language. But IMHO if your job is working on real world problems and you are already experienced, there is little value in these exams. Not that they are totally useless, I just think your time can be better spent on something else.
Hi Linchi,
I mentioned that the greatest value for me isn't the exam itself, it's the preparation process. How do you currently ensure you've had a detailed look at all new features of the updated product?
I endlessly go into sites where people are struggling because they aren't aware of how the product can actually be used. They have preconceived ideas from previous versions.
I think everyone needs to have a systematic way to explore the whole product. Exam prep guides aren't too bad for that.
I also have seen significant issues with exam questions. However, I've also seen lots of people that are sure that questions don't have all the required info, etc. and that multiple answers could have been correct. In many cases, they've missed some small aspect of the requirements of the question. The question isn't always the one that's wrong but it invariably is always the one blamed.
MSFT has attempted to address some of these issues with the 2005 exams. If you remember, there was only one SQL Certification in 7/2000. In 2005, there are 3 SQL Certs that you can achieve. These are still BROAD areas. The design of the 2005 questions are much better than the previous versions in that they attempt to use case studies.
From a Prefessional Develpoment point of view, I see the SQL certs as a measure of going the extra mile. It is one of the factors that go into a new hire, not a base requirement. Some places stipulate that a cert is a requirement; this is to further filter out the applicants. What these places don't realize is that there are many well-qulalified candidates without certs and there are many not-so-well-qualified candidates with certs.
I found that certifications when combined with practical experience can be valuable. As Greg mentioned, the beta exams are even more proof of your knowledge because there is rarely any information available about each question on the test. The SQL Server Product is too big to know everything about it, but the tests make you aware of features that you may not use often, but may benefit from learning more about when certain projects or issues arise. One more thing about beta exams.... You do not know if you passed the test for about 6-8 weeks. Fun.
"Is this going to be on the test?"
A few years ago, I went back to school to do some post-bac pre-med work. I thought I wanted to become a physician. What shocked me the most about going back to school at almost 30 years old was the mentality of the students, especially the pre-med students. The familiar question of "Is this going to be on the test?" was all too common, and disgusting to me. I saw plenty of students that got A's in the class that had absolutely no concept of what was going on with the *science*.
The same state of affairs exists with the MS exams, although passing them is quite a bit easier than getting an A in organic chemistry. There are always going to be the good test takers out there, and those who game the system in order to get a cushy, invisible job as a middle-level DBA at a large companies. That's too bad, but it's the reality.
As for me, I've never taken an MS exam, but I find myself wanting to because, as Greg said, the preparation lets you fill in the gaps in your knowledge. Are you a T-SQL expert, but have never needed to use, oh, say, replication? Well, if you want to pass the MCDBA, you'll at least have to learn about it...
The question is simply this: "What do you want to get out of it?" Do you want to fill in your own knowledge gaps? Then just prepare and take the practice tests on your own. Want to be more marketable? Pay for and take the tests... I think the debate is around whether or not it makes any sense for an experienced SQL Server person to take one of these exams from a carreer/marketability perspective. And the answer to that, like so many other things, is "it depends on where you want to go and what you want to do."
Hi Greg,
Great post! I'll be referencing it tomorrow night when we kick off our MCTS: SQL Server 2005 study group as part of the Ottawa PASS chapter.
I have to agree with all of Greg's comments. I have found that the value in certification has been the preparation process and not the exam. This is especially true when preparing for the exams with a group of people.
I've been involved in a number of certification study groups in the Ottawa area. We've found that working through the material as a group over a 12 to 16 week period really enhances the process. Participants bring their personal experiences to the table at the weekly sessions and we take the time to explore the details of the topics.
The end result is a much better understanding of the material, and a great network of friends to share with after the study group is finished. The exam serves merely as a goal to focus the group, and a validation at the end that everyone has engraned core set of skills across a wide range of product features.
David E. Myers
Executive Director
Professional Association for SQL Server
Greg, can you recommend a good study path for sql2k8 or sql2k5?
Hi Darren,
I think the exam prep guides really do provide quite a good framework for studying the product and making sure you cover most areas. I like to get the guides and go through point by point asking myself if I *really* understand each area. If I don't, bunches of reading BOL and Google searches then testing things with the product itself are the next step.
Even better are formal study groups if one happens in the person's area. David from Ottawa that posted above is an old hand at these and they work well. In addition:
1. User groups. In the case of SQL, perhaps PASS chapters specifically. There's a world of free info out there.
2. Podcasts. I particularly like www.sqldownunder.com :-)
3. MSDN and TechNet Webcasts. Kim Tripp did an excellent set of webcasts (about 10 each) for DBAs and for Developers a while back. These covered many 2005 concepts in a good deal of detail.
>> I particularly like www.sqldownunder.com
LOL... I've heard of that one :-)
The same can be said about college degrees. I have an MIS/Engineering degree (2001). Does that make me an MIS/Engineering expert as soon as I graduated, no? Does it help combined with several years experience...yes.
Same goes for certification tests. If you are "changing careers" into IT and hear those Microsoft certification ads and think that by getting your MCDBA/MCSE/MCAD and you will make 75k..ur dreaming. However, when you have 5 years of experience and want to "extend" your knowledge certifications definitely help. They also help when going into "MS partner" jobs that prefer certified candidates over those that don't have it (so in a close situation..it might help u if ur "tied" in the skill level with another candidate).
Now...when u start talking about a "real" certification like the CCIE or MCA (Microsoft Certified Architect) http://www.microsoft.com/learning/mcp/architect/solutions/default.mspx
Thats a real program that is real respected and ur not getting ur certification unless you know ur stuff.
I blogged about 'Certifications via Dump' couple of years back here - http://vadivel.blogspot.com/2006/07/microsoft-certifications-via-dumps.html
Here in Midwest certifications are apparently not in style at this time, at least among permanent employees. Most job postings do not require them, most experienced professionals do not have them and do not plan to acquire them. I was doing a lot of interviewing recently, and while some candidates did have certificates, I did not notice any difference in skills, and most candidates did not have any certificates at all. Also in my opinion certifications might be more useful to consultants who change projects frequently, but what's the use for permanent employees - most of us will never use all the features.
For example, I think our team members just need to know that there are HTTP endpoints and not waste any more time on the feature, because most likely we shall never use it at this company. Should the need occur, it is easy to learn more. Cluttering the memory with more details about the feature with very little chance of ever using it as long you keep your current job does not make sense.
Nice post Greg - my 2 cents on the matter:
I find that having certifications isn't necessarily a positive (even though they are much better than the paper MCSE days), so much as anot having them being a negative. If two people are vying for work, and all things are equal, and one has certs and the other not, the one with certs will get the job.
Running a company that is a MS partner, certifications are very important to me when it comes to myself and my employees - they play into raising my visibility with MS (sigh...taking...so...long). However, when I consider new employees, those with tons of certifications make me think twice before hiring them - when did they have the time to get those? Are they truly driven, or did they have a lot of time on their hands. And do they really know there stuff.
Unfortunately, there just is no way to truly find out if someone really knows there stuff without seeing them in action, and listening to what they have to say. Certs certainly are far from a litmus test as to whether someone knows their subject matter, but we do need some system in place. Let's just hope that the certification process continues to improve.
Hi Alex,
I understand the perspective that says "why would I want to fill my head with all this info if I'm just doing my current job?".
But that's exactly where the problem begins. When choosing how to implement anything new in your systems or how to rework anything existing, it's super important to know what options are available to you. Don't you ever have to do any sort of new work or rework?
I routinely go into sites where they've done things a very, very long way around and when I say "why didn't you just do X?", they say "ah, can you do that? None of us knew X was able to be done with the product". I see this time after time. They've wasted enormous resources for a worse outcome.
It's also a direct cause of people using SQL Server 2005 the way they used previous versions of the product without considering alternatives or improvements. If they can't describe feature X in some detail, how would they know whether or not it's appropriate to ever use at the company?
I've done a lot of interviewing DBAs in recent times. I regularly see people that tell me they are very experienced with SQL Server 2005. When I quiz them though, they are very experienced with the features of 2005 that were in SQL Server 7 and 2000. Often they know barely anything about the 2005 features. In many cases, they're not even aware that what they knew about 2000 might not be true any more, let alone the newer things.
PS: And regarding HTTP Endpoints as a specific example, they're now deprecated and people should be looking at WCF and/or ADO.NET Data Services instead.
We certainly need to educate ourselves on new features, I am not arguing with that. My point is different: currently SQL Server certification does not fit the bill. Let's start with 70-431 exam, which is a prerequisite for all other ones. Apparently the exam's authors considered HTTP endpoints to be important enough, so they required every DBA and every DBD to know abut it. The practice disagreed, HTTP Endpoints are gone now, and the time spent to learn about it is mostly wasted. Consider XML. 10% of my book on 70-431 are about XML, yet in many many shops XML is hardly if at all used - not because we don't know about the feature, but because the business does not need it. More to the point, although I frequently use bcp, I see no need to memorize its parameters. Learning when and how to use it would be sufficient.
Unfortunately in 70-431 there is little room left for what is really important to get my job done. Compare 90 pages on XML vs. just 10 pages on locking, isolation levels, and deadlocking together. I would rather have it the other way around.
IMO every database professional needs a solid understanding of locking, isolation levels, and deadlocking, and it is OK if a mid-livel DBD has little knowledge of replication or service broker. Yet 70-431 apparently considers service broker several times more important than locking, isolation levels, and deadlocking together. Probably it makes sense in some other environments, but definitely not where I work and have worked for the last decade or more.
So from where I sit, what one learns to pass 70-431 is not a must which every DBA and DBD needs to know. I would more agree with Denis Gobo, his list of must-knows makes more sense to me:
This is my second attempt to answer you. The first disappeared.
I am not saying one does not need to learn. I am saying that current certification is not much relevant. Consider 70-431 exam and the following book:
There are just 10 pages on all locking, concurrency, isolation level, and deadlocks, and 90 pages on XML. I would say that XML is less important than locking, concurrency, isolation level, and deadlocks. I think good understanding of concurrency is a must for every database professional, while not everyone needs to know how to deal with XML in such detail.
I think requiring 9 times more knowledge about XML than on concurrency is very strange.
I am not blaming the book, I think the book is very good, but I think the choice of questions for the most basic exam 70-431 is seriously skewed: it has more requirements on HTTP endpoints which almost nobody ever used, and which are gone, than on concurrency, which everyone needs.
I've been thinking about taking an exam for quite a while. I've been working on SQL Server since 6.5, but I have yet to take an exam. I can't see the value in it, since it doesn't provide further insight into my knowledge base. For the most part (and it's actually almost all), I've interviewed many job candidates that have a certification, with little to no experience, claiming to know how things work. But, when we drill down into basic concepts, there's no real indepth knowledge. Exams don't prove anything, especially when they're only based on fact knowledge (rote memorization). I'm good at what I do, because I'm able to think through real-world issues, as they come up in an everyday work environment, not because I can take a test...my work environment IS my exam environment. Fortunately, I get paid to take tests nearly everyday.
I see consulting firms needing this kind of rhetoric, to show that they are "qualified". But for most full-time employees of any fortune 1000+ company, there's little need for anyone to get certified. It only costs money that needn't be spent. The training might be worth it for the inexperienced, but why would I send someone to a course that only teaches to an exam. Service Broker is a good example to expose the arguments weaknesses. Looking through the exams, Service Broker is a lightly covered subject, but it resolves so many of the issues that large scale systems have today. I've implemented it on grand scale, but the subject is only marginally covered in the exams. No exam is going to expose the difficulites encountered when deploying it in production. And if you've never done, you wouldn't know, based on the exams. Another example is the subject of sliding window table partitioning. How relevant is that to large scale implementations? Extremely relevant. How does one get trained on the subject? Not through any certification I know of. It doesn't exist today, in any format. However, in SQL Server 2008, it's so important that the tools are actually built to support this. Where is bulk loading covered in the exams? It's a difficult subject to tackle, given all of the variables. It can't reasonably be done in a course, given how hardware and software play together, as Linchi has so effortlessly shown all of us over the years. His knowledge is built on many hours of testing many scenarios and their variables. He didn't just wake up one day and say, "this is the only correct answer". There's no such thing in the real world, and that's what exams portend to expose. We all go through this everyday and no exam will ever replace that. We spend weeks putting together projects that satisfy our particular business needs. Since I don't work at fabrikam or adventureworks, I'm not going to ever give that much thought to their business model or infrastructure issues. But I can guarantee you that almost every DBA that is worth their salt is intimately aware of the challenges that face their implementation. It's the nature of what we do.
The argument that anyone makes, saying that an experienced veteran needs an exam to let them know what the technological options are is pretty far-fetched. Any DBA/DEV worth their salt is going to continue to expand their horizons, regardless of whether there is an exam in their future. How many of us have already begun working with the 2008 features to see how they will fit into their current or future projects? Probably the vast majority of the folks reading this...the others will always be one step behind, regardless of whether they go to a course or not.
IMHO, exams are used to get people in the door, not to continue to keep it open.
Hi Don,
I'm not arguing that experienced folk need exams to let them know what the options are at all. Quite the contrary. I've pointed out that the exam process is very flawed.
What I am saying is that the exam preparation process is worthwhile as it provides a structured way to cover off the topics. Once I've done that, doing the exam is almost an afterthought.
Don't you find it interesting that you mention that service broker isn't covered enough yet Alex above is arguing that 70-431 covers it too much? I happen to agree with you regarding service broker. We're currently involved in an implementation involving it spread across over 1600 servers.
I can only suggest that your shop may well be different in terms of keeping properly across the updated products. It's great that you do so but it's in stark contrast to what I see daily across a large number of shops.
Have you actually taken 70-431 or are you basing your thoughts on it from an exam prep guide book? Often the books also skew the balance of the material depending upon the author's tastes.
I found 70-431 pretty straightforward. The only thing I really didn't like was that one of the interactive questions requires a really dumb answer. I know what they were after and selected it but it was not sensible. I asked one of the question writers about it (along the lines of "what on earth were you thinking?". I understand his explanation (and can't share it here) but hopefully that'll get updated soon (or by now).
In terms of the exams, it's been a perennial discussion that they tend to focus on new features more than on existing ones. That's why you see the skew of topics towards new things. I would rather see exams that tackle say SQL Server 2008 as if there never was a previous version rather than exams that assume you've done 2005.
I also found 431 very straight forward. In fact, i believe that if you have a solid foundation in SQL 2000 and have attended webcasts and read up on SQL 2005, you could pass it very easily. There is a tendancy to focus on New Features as I believe it is also a marketing ploy. Remember, MSFT is a very good marketing company. Your point on a test that doesn't focus on the latest version is good. If a person knows everything about the latest features, but can't identify some basic requirements (concurrency, backups, normalization, etc.) then it loses some value.
I used to have certifications for previous versions of SQL Server, but this time I just read half a dozen books and did not actually take any exams.
I would be happy if there were an exam covering the essentials, something similar to what Denis Gobo described - he actually very well listed what many of us hiring managers really care about. If there were such an exam, with the contents I care about and the integrity level I could rely on, that would save me a lot of time, plenty of phone interviews and so on.
For saving a lot of time, another thing I'm involved with is:
where we use a team of expert interviewers depending upon the topic. Currently only SQL Server and .NET topics are examined.
Thank you for the information!


text:
We came here last year a little earlier in November.
Although there wasn't as many colourful leaves from what I vaguely remember last time, it was a pleasant walk through the wilderness. This time we caught the cable car both up and down to maximize our walking time.
In doing so we covered a much wider area over six hours. By the end my calf muscles would be aching for another day or two.
Well worth a day trip out this way if you like hiking.
Sunday, 27 November 2011
Mt Mitake Take Two
We came here last year a little earlier in November.
Posted by Jimmy In Japan at 10:45 pm
0 comments:
Subscribe to: Post Comments (Atom)


text:
When it comes to baking, our go-to maven is Miriam Pascal from Overtime Cook. We have no idea where the Overtime Cook finds the time, but this guide will give picture-perfect hamentashen! - CookKosher
I am so disappointed. I followed the directions for the Hamentashen, did not overfill, did not roll the dough too thin and used the egg whites to seal the seams.. The majority of them opened. Any suggestions?
I wet my fingers with water and run them along the edges of the dough before I pinch the hamentashen together. It works like glue for me. I've been making hamentashen for years but, I am still looking for that perfect bakery type dough (soft and sweet with just the right crispness.)
We have so many choices I'm sure one of them will hit the mark http://bit.ly/zgCb6F
What do you fill them with? I've never had these and they look delicious!
I haven't read your recipe yet but I would like to share mine. Go to my blog: www.amorebakedgoods.blogspot.com and read the Hamantaschen posting for Phyllis' Cookies.


text:
Charter Schools
Pembroke Pines 'Charter Starters' go K-12
About half of Pembroke Pines students attend charter schools. This year's graduating class was the first to go from kindergarten through 12th grade exclusively in the charter system.
When the seniors graduated last month from Pembroke Pines Charter High School in south Broward County, they became the first to make the journey from kindergarten to 12th grade entirely in the city's charter school system. "Our charter starters," says Pembroke Pines Mayor Frank Ortis, who doubles as de facto chair of the city-run system's school board.
Founded 13 years ago in reaction to parental concerns over the county district's traditional public schools, Pembroke Pines' charter system now encompasses about half of the city's school-age students, 5,700 students in A-graded schools culminating in a high school with a 98.6% graduation rate and 94% of kids going on to college.
Principals at the five schools run their own shows, answering to City Manager Charles Dodge, who serves as superintendent overseeing 400 full-time school staffers, 83 part-timers and a $50-million budget. City commissioners serve as the school board. City staffers double as school support workers, eliminating the need for a centralized administration and its payroll. "I think that's one of the reasons we have been able to survive on the low level of resources we get compared to the traditional schools," Dodge says.
Not only survive but thrive, as he tells it. The waiting list is 9,000 long for the schools, which are Southern Association of Colleges and Schools accredited. "Financially sound, academically challenging and successful, the record speaks to that," he says.
Pembroke Pines has had to deal with falling state funding but has managed to preserve art and music courses even as traditional publics axed them. Parents have to put in 30 hours of volunteer time a year. Even as the Broward district is in the news for spending $8 million for two 10-lane pools for after-school sports that are too deep to teach beginning swimmers, Pembroke Pines has Olympic-size pools that double as community pools.
Other charter school operators say Broward is one of the most receptive counties in Florida, but the view is different in Pembroke Pines. The issue: The district doesn't share enough tax revenue. Pembroke Pines officials point to how many kids the city's charter system has taken off the district's hands. The $100 million the city system spent on school buildings is a fraction, the city believes, of what the district would have spent. Plus, Pines pays a 5% administration fee to the district. But the district doesn't share all the revenue it collects from Pines homeowners.
Few municipalities have followed Pembroke Pines. The list of Florida municipal charter schools includes Palm Bay, Coral Springs, Aventura, Hialeah, Miami Shores, Cape Coral and Oakland (west of Orlando).


text:
What is MMS
MMS stands for 'multimedia messaging service'. In contrast to SMS (short message service), phone user can send longer text message than SMS. Besides that, media such as audio, video and images can embedded in the message too.
Nowadays, there is new style of blogging called micro blogging or live blogging. The main idea of live blogging is to send MMS (picture and text) to Flickr, and then Flickr website will handle the MMS message by automatically creating a blog post at your website based on the MMS. This should save you a lot of time in transferring picture. It is not a dream anymore to blog anywhere by using live blogging, even at a place with no internet connection.
What is 3G
3G is like GPRS with more speed. You can see the details here.


text:
User Agreement & Privacy Policy
User Agreement / Terms of Service Disclaimer
Tagsale.com, its parent, agents and assignees herein designated as 'company' shall not be responsible for any errors or omissions and reserves the right to make changes without notice, refund or adjustments to previous payments; including but not limited to category names, order and general flow, titles, layout and design, promotional offers, pricing, ad duration and otherwise. All company and third party information including but not limited to individual ads, and corporate banner advertising is provided "as is". User acknowledges ads are posted by other users and company is not responsible for the content or information. Company disclaims any and all warranties with regard to the information provided, including the implied warranties of merchantability and fitness for a particular purpose, and non-infringement and will not be responsible for typographical errors or otherwise. In no event shall Tagsale.com its agents or assignees, the company be liable for any special, indirect, consequential or incidental damages, loss of revenue, damages for lost profits, or loss of use, or otherwise related to or arising out of any information contained within, whether such damages arise in contract, negligence, under statute, in equity, tort, at law or otherwise. Furthermore you agree to indemnify and hold harmless Tagsale.com, its parent, agents or assignees. By proceeding you agree that you fully understand and accept all the terms of this user agreement disclaimer, and wish to use Tagsale.com at your own risk.
Privacy Policy
Tagsale.com will never share with a third party any information submitted by our visitors which is beyond the scope of processing and fulfillment of your products and or services, or to monitor and enhance the functionality and features of our website. Please do not use our website if you are outside of the United States or your regional laws or requirements, or your personal privacy preferences do not align with our privacy policy.


text:
As if he didn't have a busy enough year, Steven Spielberg is plunging into yet another project: a restaurant with Disney's Jeffrey Katzenberg. Called Dive!, it will open in May in Los Angeles's Century City mall. It promises to be the theme restaurant to beat all theme restaurants — it'll look like a big submarine, the menu features submarine sandwiches and the bar stools will be fake torpedoes.
Although the CFDA doesn't want to go Hollywood for this year's awards, the council has asked Rosie O'Donnell to honor Adidas, Converse, Keds, Reebok and Nike for the sneaker, which is being cited for its "uniquely American influence on the world of fashion."
The reviews of his show may not have been good, but David Salle has one big fan. When his exhibit opened at the Gagosian gallery recently, one of the paintings featured in the catalog never made it to the show. That's because Ronald Perelman bought it before the show opened.


text:
Other Travel
More Featured Jobs
More Classifieds
Business Opportunities
Build on Boardwalk While You are Here & Make a Mint!
General Merchandise
Find the Stuff You Need for Less to Set Your Apt. Up Right
Cupid! Draw Back Your Booooooowwwww....
Apartments & Roommates
Diggidy Digs for You to Call Home.


text:
Our product
For your business
Log in
Sign up now
Invoice insurance for
Flexible invoice insurance from Parker Norfolk & Partners
Insure your invoices against non-payment in three easy steps. Brought to you by Nimbla in partnership with Parker Norfolk & Partners.
Sign up now
By using this link to sign up you agree to signing up to Nimbla as a referral from Parker Norfolk & Partners.
020 3984 8833
*Terms and conditions apply
Nimbla is a trading name of TradeCrediTech Limited which is an appointed representative of Ambant Underwriting Services Limited, a company authorised and regulated by the Financial Conduct Authority under firm reference number 597301 to carry on insurance distribution activities. TradeCrediTech is registered in England and Wales company number 10211946, registered office at 133 Whitechapel High Street, London, E1 7QA.