text:
India squad announced for 2020 Women's Olympic qualifiers
New Delhi: The Indian senior national women's football team will travel to Myanmar for the first round of the Tokyo 2020 Olympics qualifying tournament later this month, the squad for which was announced on Saturday. Coach Maymol Rocky named the final squad of players that will make the trip to Yangon. Over the last two […]
Published: Sunday, 04 November 2018
Last updated: 04 November 2018, 10:23 AM IST
Indian-senior-football-team
New Delhi: The Indian senior national women's football team will travel to Myanmar for the first round of the Tokyo 2020 Olympics qualifying tournament later this month, the squad for which was announced on Saturday.
Coach Maymol Rocky named the final squad of players that will make the trip to Yangon.
Over the last two weeks, the players were camped in Mumbai as they prepared for the task ahead.
A total of 10 teams will move forward to the second round and if the Indian team is to progress, it will be a remarkable achievement for the women's team, which has never crossed the first hurdle at Olympic level in the past.
Talking about the team, Rocky said, "The girls are ready and looking forward to play. We will enter the tournament with a positive mindset among the players as well as the entire staff.
"Our aim is to go through to the next round and we are looking forward to that. We need to qualify and I'm confident that we will do so."
She added, "I expect all the girls to rise to the occasion and give a good account of themselves. The players in the starting XI as well as the substitutes - each member will have a crucial role to play."
The Indian team will take on Nepal in their first encounter on November 8, followed by Bangladesh on November 11 and hosts Myanmar on November 13.
The team selected is as follows:
GOALKEEPERS: E. Panthoi Chanu, Aditi Chauhan, M. Linthoingambi Devi
DEFENDERS: L. Ashalata Devi, Manisha Panna, Ng. Sweety Devi, Jabamani Tudu, Dalima Chhibber, Pyari Xaxa
MIDFIELDERS: Sangita Basfore, Sanju Yadav, Margaret Devi, Ranjana Chanu, Indumathi Kathiresan
FORWARDS: Y. Kamala Devi, Anju Tamang, N. Ratanbala Devi, Ng. Bala Devi, Dangmei Grace, R. Sandhiya Ranganathan.
'Right Panel Bottom'
Indian National Women's Football Team


Research indicates that young people having a knowledge of healthy relationships and consent is a protective factor and decreases vulnerability to sexual exploitation. Recent inquiries have also indicated that peer on peer child sexual exploitation is the most common form of CSE across the UK, and some forms of peer on peer abuse e.g. sharing indecent images of a child via smart phone technology and sexual bullying can occur on school premises. With this in mind, it is important that schools inform young people about these issues.


It is my pleasure to lead the debate on the Energy Legislation Amendment (Victorian Default Offer) Bill 2019 for the Liberal-National parties in coalition. From the outset can I say that while the minister and I may differ on ideological and policy direction, I appreciate that she always make sure that her staff give good briefings and are available. I give my appreciation to her for that and to her chief of staff, Ian Porter, for facilitating the briefing. I will just start out with a brief precis of the bill. This bill facilitates the introduction of a default offer for Victorian energy users. It ensures that energy contracts are made clearer for consumers. The Essential Services Commission will be given new powers to report on the fairness of pricing, and the bill gives the minister in particular significant powers in relation to directing the Essential Services Commission to set the default offer at a specific level. Why are we here debating this bill? One of the reasons is—and it is the main reason—that energy consumers have been bending under the weight of rising prices in recent times. Energy users are certainly noticing that their power bills have gone up significantly. Indeed not just the Victorian government but indeed the federal government have recognised that there is a need to take some of the pressure off these energy prices and do something for consumers. I am sure—I am almost positive—that we will hear those opposite talk about energy generation and privatisation in the 1990s, how it was all the Liberals' fault and how Jeff Kennett sold off everything. We have heard the Premier ad nauseam say that if it was not for the privatisation of our generators, we would not be in this position now. That is the line that the government has delivered.
In a press release of 26 October last year the minister said, in words attributable to her: We're putting power back in the hands of Victorians—who've put up for too long with big corporations ripping consumers off ever since the Liberals privatised our electricity. That is the line of the government, and it is nothing but spin, because certainly privatisation has been the issue, but not the privatisation of generation but indeed the privatisation of the retail sector. That is evident if you just take a moment to look at the documents surrounding this particular issue. The discussion paper which marked the beginning of the review into the electricity and gas retail markets in Victoria says very clearly in its introduction, and I quote: Full retail contestability was introduced for Victorian small customers in the electricity and gas markets in January 2002. In January 2009, the Victorian— Labor— Government removed retail price regulation with the intention that consumers could fully benefit from the competitive market. The introduction goes on to say that: … retail competition in electricity and gas markets in Victoria is not delivering benefits to consumers as expected. It was Labor policy to introduce full retail contestability in 2002, and the removal of retail price regulation in 2009 by the Brumby government has not delivered the sorts of outcomes that both the Labor governments at those times said they would deliver. You only have to look through some of the documents, such as the Independent Review into the Electricity and Gas Retail Markets in Victoria by John Thwaites and Terry Mulder. They make the same discoveries. It says here on page 1: The review was prompted by concerns that the deregulation of Victoria's energy markets is not delivering the anticipated benefits to consumers. Competition was introduced to Victoria's energy markets in 2002, with full deregulation of retail prices in 2009. It was expected that competition would reduce energy costs for consumers and that retail companies would innovate and improve the products and services they offered. But clearly that has not happened. In the same report it also says: The Jacobs analysis— the Jacobs analysis is the analysis that was done to support this review— showed that fixed charges have increased substantially for Victorian electricity customers since— not the privatisation of generators in the 1990s but since— deregulation in 2009. It was under the Labor government's watch that we saw those prices spike, and the reason is evident in these documents. It goes on to say: Since prices were deregulated in 2009, the existence of standing offers … may have contributed to some of the issues in the current market. So the deregulation in 2009 certainly contributed to the problems that we are seeing now. We go on to see an article that was in the Australian in February of this year. It states that Tony Wood of the Grattan Institute told the Australian that: … there was no doubt there was a need for action in a retail market which was 'clearly not delivering' what had been promised when it was privatised … I make the point again that anyone who has had even a cursory look at this topic will tell you that it was the privatisation of the retail market that has caused the problems. If there is any doubt from those opposite that it is indeed the case, there is an article from 2015 that is headlined 'Victorians "dudded" on electricity' that says: John Thwaites, who was deputy to former premier Steve Bracks in 2002 when the government deregulated the retail electricity market, told Fairfax Media the reform had failed to deliver lower prices for households. This is what Mr Thwaites said: Clearly, that part of the policy has not worked … the retail component has increased very substantially. He went on to say that in developing the policy to deregulate energy retailers: … everyone expected that there would be more competition and therefore a reduction in bills.
The figures show that that hasn't happened. So that is a former Deputy Premier, who sat around the cabinet table and indeed sat at this table during those years, saying that the Labor policies that were put forward in 2002 and indeed 2009 did not work for the consumer and in fact contributed, as we have seen with the associated documents, to the price rises that we are now experiencing and the price rises that Victorian consumers are now bending under the weight of. It is an interesting thing. I have been here long enough to have heard the Labor Party talk about cost-of-living pressures and the things that they should do to bring down those energy prices. It seems that every time the Labor Party comes up with an idea to supposedly help Victorian consumers things just get worse. I was here when Peter Batchelor talked about the reasons for introducing smart meters, and he guaranteed everyone it would bring prices down. Introducing smart meters cost Victorian consumers $2.5 billion, and I am not sure many of those consumers would say that it has been beneficial for them. Lastly, of course, the government's policy to close Hazelwood has certainly added to the problems. The Independent Review into the Electricity and Gas Retail Markets in Victoria when talking about the privatisation of generators in the 1990s as an issue actually devotes a page to the closure of Hazelwood where it says: The announcement of the Hazelwood closure has led to significant increases in forward contract prices for wholesale electricity. … The Jacobs analysis demonstrates that large increases in wholesale electricity prices in Victoria could be expected from the closure of Hazelwood. Since its closure, wholesale spot prices have increased significantly as anticipated … It was anticipated by many in the sector, and indeed I think that many of the consumers would also have anticipated those price rises. It is interesting that the government of the day did not anticipate those price rises. It shows you the lack of foresight from this government and the Premier. The following is a report of what the Premier was saying back in November 2016: He acknowledged that a hike in electricity prices would put pressure on family budgets but dismissed estimates of a 25 per cent increase as 'wild, inaccurate'. Any price rise would be close to 4 per cent, or an average of 85 cents a week, he said. That was from the Premier when Hazelwood shut. The reason for the legislation we have in front of us is that indeed we have seen price rises that are far, far in excess of 4 per cent. Indeed the 25 per cent rise that was put forward at that time, which the Premier so arrogantly dismissed as 'wild' and 'inaccurate', has actually come to pass. If you are a business, a dairy farmer or a cafe owner you will find that your price increases are in the order of maybe 100 to 200 per cent. The Premier's comments there were certainly ones that were actually, in his words, 'wild' and 'inaccurate'. It just shows you that when the Labor Party talks about wanting to do something about price rises when we are talking about deregulating the retail sector, removing price regulation, introducing smart meters or closing down a major supplier of energy in the state, all we get in response is that prices just keep rising. As I said earlier even former Deputy Premier John Thwaites acknowledges that the policies put forward by the government that he was a part of were not to the advantage of the Victorian energy consumer. This of course has led to a record number of disconnections, which I spoke about in the media last week and which was reported in the Herald Sun. It is certainly fair to say—and it is certainly not just the opposition saying this; any commentator will tell you—that the policies of the Labor government seem to be front and centre when it comes to rising energy prices. We only saw in the paper today that when moving from electricity to gas, which this bill also covers, the gas crisis is costing jobs.
The Herald Sun today reports: Australian Competition and Consumer Commission chair Rod Sims says the east coast states are in the grip of a gas "crisis" that has been compounded by governments blocking exploration and extraction. Wholesale prices are almost triple the historical average … That, again, is a Labor policy to continue with the moratorium on gas exploration in this state. That is causing—there is no doubt—prices to rise. As I said with Labor's words, Labor has talked about, over the last 20 years, deregulation of the energy retail market, the deregulation of energy pricing, the pricing framework, smart meters and Hazelwood, but the prices just keep going up and up and up. So having discussed the environment that we now find ourselves in, which is largely due to Labor policies, let us turn to the bill. And I want to just mention, before we continue on to the particulars of the bill, that while the government is introducing its default offer, the federal government is also doing its part to do likewise. I want to acknowledge the work of Angus Taylor, the federal Minister for Energy, who has done a fair bit to make sure that people are paying less than they otherwise could be. I just want to quote a release from the Honourable Angus Taylor which says: On 1 January, energy retailers including Origin, EnergyAustralia and AGL have lowered their standing offer prices following pressure from the Morrison Government to remove the loyalty tax for the almost one million standing offer customers who are paying too much for their electricity. It goes on to say: Other retailers are also offering targeted discounts for their concession customers, with EnergyAustralia and Origin also providing 10–15 per cent off usage charges. We have seen, because of the work of the federal government, that AGL has taken 10 per cent off the whole bill for all standing offer customers, EnergyAustralia has taken 15 per cent and Origin has taken 17 per cent for the whole bill for non-concession customers and 26 per cent for concession customers. So there is work being done at a federal level that has direct flow-through effects for the Victorian consumer, and we should acknowledge that. The bill before us today allows, essentially, for the giving of an order by the minister to the Essential Services Commission to determine the default offer. The minister, in issuing this order, can be quite prescriptive, including—and this is slightly troubling—detailing the methodology that the ESC should use in determining the default price. I have some concerns about that, because while the industry is not entirely comfortable with the ESC being aware of how to set a default price, I think the industry would be even more concerned that the minister would probably not be across the details of how energy pricing is constructed. So there is some concern that the minister can be quite prescriptive in the manner in which she directs the ESC to set these default prices. The bill also allows for the minister to decide that certain costs are not in the best interests of the consumer even if the retailer insists that those costs are essential, and there is no requirement for the minister to actually tell the retailers why she is not allowing certain costs. The bill allows for discounts to be regulated, and the bill also allows the minister to direct the Essential Services Commission to change the default offer at will. This may not happen, but certainly the bill allows that power to the minister to direct the ESC to change that default offer. It could be every third month; that is quite possible and the bill allows for that. One troubling issue is that the order that the minister will issue to the ESC will override existing contracts between the retailer and the customer, and I am still unsure and concerned, despite having the briefing, as to whether the tearing up of contracts between an energy retailer and customers may expose the state to some sort of recompense. Certainly I know that this government does not mind tearing up contracts. I know they do not really care whether that costs.
Clause 5 of the bill gives the ESC the power to use their discretion to decide a whole range of terms and conditions in relation to the conduct of retailers. In particular it allows the ESC to: specify the circumstances in which the licensee may, or must not, offer or give a discount or other benefit to a relevant customer, including— (A) the maximum amount or value of a discount or other benefit that may be offered or given to a relevant customer; and (B) the periods when a discount or other benefit may be offered … This gives, as I said, a whole range of powers to the ESC. And if they exercise those powers we are not too far off re-regulation of the industry. And of course it is true to say that the minister's order may turn that commission's discretion into an opportunity to re-regulate the market. That is okay if that is what the government wants to do. If the government want to we regulate the market, they are entitled to do so, but I guess they should be up-front about that. They should be up-front about that particular intention if that is what they want to do, and it seems very clear as we go through the bill that that is what they intend to do.
Clause 7 deals with the ability of the Essential Services Commission to: … monitor and report on the competitiveness and efficiency of the Victorian retail markets for electricity and gas. And there are some concerns from industry as to whether the ESC is in a position to be able to do that credibly. There are some concerns, looking at the Essential Services Commission staff working paper on the Victorian default offer, that the commission is not fully aware of what makes an efficient retailer and what costs should be included. On page 6 of that particular document, in the section entitled, 'What is an efficient retailer?', the commission is saying that an efficient retailer is one that, amongst other things, 'has achieved economies of scale'—that is just not possible for a third-tier retailer at all. It also says that an efficient retailer 'is a standalone retailer and is not vertically integrated'—again, that just does not apply to first-tier retailers at all. So there are some concerns that the commission may not be aware of what makes an efficient retailer or how costs are determined or, indeed, how the competitiveness or efficiency of the market can be determined. The industry has some concerns about confidentiality when the commission is gathering information. Certainly the different retailers do not want other retailers knowing their business, and they have expressed some concern about confidentiality issues.
Clause 8 is an interesting one. This has the effect of removing the opportunity for retailers to have a merits review as a result of the commission setting a default price. The retailers will be able to have a judicial review if the facts are wrong, but again if we look to the Essential Services Commission Act 2001, there is a whole group of sections about the right of appeal for people who are aggrieved by a requirement made by the commission, a decision made by the commission or indeed a determination made by the commission, and those rights of appeal are being denied to the retailers under this particular act, which is of some concern to the retailers. They have raised those concerns with the government, but I am told they have apparently fallen on deaf ears. I just want to turn to what the sector and those connected to the sector are actually saying. Overwhelmingly, if you look at what the market is saying and what those connected to the market are saying, they are against the introduction of a default offer. The main reason that keeps coming back is that there is a fear that the default offer will in fact squeeze smaller retailers out of the market. That will of course in effect reduce competition and will see many of the discounted offers that are currently in the market removed. That is of some concern because there are many who are on these deeply discounted offers who may find that they are no longer able to take advantage of those offers. The fact that these concerns have been raised should really ring some alarm bells for the government and should raise a red flag. We do not want to see a situation where people are paying more for electricity than they otherwise would be. That is a concern, because out of a pool of around 2.3 million to 2.5 million electricity customers in this state, only about 166 000 are on these standing offers. Many of them are also on hardship packages. If this legislation is going to help those 166 000 customers get a better deal, that is all fine—remembering that the trend for those on standing offers is actually declining—but if we are going to help those 166 000 customers pay less, it should not be at the expense of the many other customers who are paying those deeply discounted rates at the moment. If the third-tier retailers cannot afford to operate by having their highest rates capped, then they will exit the market. That has been made clear by everyone in the industry. It will limit the incentive for other retailers to have these discounted rates. Some third-tier retailers have been known to offer discounted rates of up to $400 per customer—$400 below the average discounted rates. Those rates are being offered, and some in the chamber would probably be the beneficiaries of those deeply discounted offers from third-tier retailers. It is fairly certain, if you listen to the industry, that those offers will eventually go. It is not just the opposition saying that; there have been numerous reports on it. The Australian Energy Council did a review into the Thwaites report and raised many concerns as a result of that review. The report says, and I am quoting: The Basic Service Offer— the default offer, as the legislation terms it— will likely result in a significant reduction in retail competition … It then says: … the regulated price will put the most pressure on Tier 2 and particularly Tier 3 retailers—the very retailers that, to date have offered the lowest prices and a great deal of the innovation in the market … It goes on to say: … almost all of the Tier 2 and Tier 3 retailers have a significant proportion of their customer base in Victoria, and losses in this market are likely to reduce their overall scale in ways that could seriously jeopardise the viability of their operations … That is of some concern. The same report goes on to say with regard to the Thwaites report: … its primary recommendation—implementation of a regulated Basic Service Offer—will likely reduce competition and innovation, and particularly impact the smaller and new entrant retailers that, to date, have offered the lowest prices and a great deal of the innovation in the market. It will also likely undercut the effectiveness of a number of the other recommendations in the report and other initiatives that are already underway in the market. That is the report from the Australian Energy Council.
There are other reports. This one is from the Australian Energy Market Commission giving advice to the Council of Australian Governments energy council—so the minister has seen this report. This report details the impacts of a default offer in response to the federal government's move to introduce a scheme similar to that which the Victorian government is putting through. I will just quote some of the concerns raised in this particular report: Noting that there is a reasonably wide variation in retailers standing offer, it could be expected that where a default offer is set below a retailer's standing offer, the retailer would attempt to recover lost revenue by raising market offer prices. It goes on to say: Based on the ACCC's analysis of retailer profitability and pricing behaviour, international examples of the re-introducing price regulation and observations of outcomes in regulated and deregulated markets it is likely that retailers will respond to the introduction of the default offer by attempting to increase market offers. It further states: Based on the declining proportion of customers on standing offers and the short and long term risks associated with the default offer, the Commission considers that caution should be exercised in introducing the default offer as a regulated price cap. It also says: The outcomes of this is a risk that a large portion of customers could be worse off under the default offer. That is certainly not something that should be foisted on the Victorian energy consumer. That they would be even worse off would pose some difficulty. The Australian Energy Market Commission also looked at the effects of a default price in other jurisdictions. In the UK they found that two years after a default price was introduced the average price for the cheapest market tariffs had increased by 40 per cent. The commission also did some forecasting or modelling work on the effect of a default price in New South Wales, south-east Queensland and South Australia and found that a default offer being introduced in New South Wales would raise the lowest average standing offer by 23.6 per cent. In South Australia it would raise it by 25.8 per cent and in south-east Queensland by a whopping 30.8 per cent, which are huge increases to those lower offers. We want to make sure that the government is very aware that this legislation could indeed make people worse off than they are now. Just last week the Essential Services Commission released the Victorian Energy Market Report 2017–18. With a profile of the energy retailers towards the back of the report, that showed us that many of these smaller retailers currently offer discounts that are $100 or $200 and up to $400 below the average discounted rate. All the advice that you read and all the reports that you read will show that these discounted rates will likely go. With just 166 000 people on standing offers, with many of these already getting rebates as part of hardship plans and with declining numbers on standing offers, it is worth posing the question: how many customers will actually see a benefit from this legislation? The sector has asked for a regulatory impact statement.
I have seen the emails and the letters to the government with regard to asking for a RIS or a legislative impact assessment, and indeed the Treasurer put out the Victorian Guide to Regulation. He says that providing these legislative impact assessments is part of achieving best practice and goes on to say in this particular document: Impact assessment is fundamentally good policy‑making. I think we all agree with that. To understand the impact that legislation is going to have on a particular sector or those who are stakeholders in the issues that legislation will affect, you should have an impact assessment. This document says: To get the most value from impact assessment, build it into policy development from the outset, rather than treat it as an additional compliance exercise at the end. The government itself says that an impact assessment is necessary and is good policymaking. It begs the question as to why the government has refused in this case to allow the industry to have one, to actually have a full understanding of the impacts that this particular legislation will have not just on the sector, not just on the retailers, but indeed on the Victorian consumer. Again the submissions to the ESC from the various energy retailers will also highlight these concerns. The submission from Sumo Power said: Attempting to set a— Victorian default offer— that reflects the efficient costs of all retailers is an impossible task. EnergyAustralia said: … the benefits may be small Victoria has lowest proportion of customers on standing offers that would directly benefit … and this proportion is declining. Simply Energy said: … the cost to serve for the Big 3 retailers— as detailed in the Thwaites report— does not reflect the experiences of other market participants. So there are some concerns and they are concerns that should be noted by the government. It is interesting that this legislation actually does bestow particular powers on the minister to potentially—and I would say probably—effectively re-regulate the market. We certainly agree that we should be supporting those who are spending too much on energy bills, but it is a relatively small group of people who will benefit. I wholeheartedly agree that those who need the benefit should be allowed to have the benefit. There are certainly many people who are struggling under the weight of household pressures at the moment, household costs, but it seems to me and leads me to believe that this legislation is more about the intention to re‑regulate the market than it is about having a Victorian default offer in place. The opposition is not opposing this particular piece of legislation. We agree that cost-of-living pressures need to be addressed. But I ask speakers on the other side—just one, just one speaker from the opposite side—to guarantee that no electricity user will be worse off under this legislation. I do not think that is something that any speaker is able to do. I do not think any speaker opposite will acknowledge the failures of the 2002 and 2009 policies.
As I have said, anyone connected to the industry, anyone who has done a report into the industry, anyone who has looked at the industry—indeed the former Deputy Premier John Thwaites himself—agrees that the failed policies of the 2002 Bracks government and the 2009 Brumby government have led to these price increases. You can talk about privatisation of generators as much as you want, but it is simply not true. It is just political rhetoric to say so. It is indeed the policies of the Labor government between 2002 and 2009 that have been directly responsible for the price rises we have seen. As I said before, it does not matter what the Labor Party says about trying to reduce the cost of living, whether it is the closure of Hazelwood, whether it is smart meters, whether it is the re-regulation of the market— Ms Thomas interjected. Mr R SMITH: Well, the member for Macedon may laugh, but I was in this chamber when Peter Batchelor told us how much prices would come down as smart meters came in—$2.5 billion from the electricity consumer, from the Victorian energy consumer, and that cost has been one that has been borne by the Victorian energy consumer. Isn't it just typical that when we are talking about the hardships imposed by Labor policies on consumers in Victoria the response from the Labor Party is to laugh at them. That just sums it all up. You have done a very, very good job in summing up the complete lack of care and responsibility that this government has. As I said, if not one speaker from the other side can even acknowledge the failures of the 2002 and 2009 policies, then they stand condemned for that. In fact by introducing legislation that effectively gives the minister power to re‑regulate the market, the minister is in fact acknowledging the failures of the Brumby and Bracks governments. They are actually acknowledging the failures of the policies in the same way that the former Deputy Premier, John Thwaites, condemned those policies. Mr Richardson interjected. Mr R SMITH: Just to clarify for the member for Mordialloc, who speaks a lot more than he listens, the opposition will not be opposing this bill. As I said, I certainly think that the government, those opposite, if they truly think that this is good legislation should guarantee that no electricity consumer in this state will be worse off under this piece of legislation.


One thing every day for 100 days.. how hard can it be? Well, not too hard as I've signed up for the same thing for a second year.
I've learnt that it has to be something really easy and quick to do - the longer it takes and the harder it is, the greater the possibility that you won't complete the 100 days and drop out along the way. And me being compulsive and a wee bit driven find it really hard to say I've lost the battle.. competitive I think, is what some people might describe it.
October is proving to be a busy busy month what with three paintings on 'commission' and an Art Swap to run. On top of that I've signed up again for the 100 Days Project as I did last year - don't know why I do this to myself - but what fun it's been!
I've done some work on one of my 'recycled' paintings, acrylic work done on an older oil painting called 'home' ;-) - here is a one minute slideshow of the process so far.


text:
'Believed' hosts named Livingston Award finalists
Michigan Radio
Published May 2, 2019 at 3:09 PM EDT
Michigan Radio reporters Lindsey Smith and Kate Wells have been named finalists for the 2019 University of Michigan Livingston Awards for Young Journaists. The nomination of the pair in the "Local Reporting" category recognizes their work on the award winning podcast series, Believed.
Winners will be announced on June 4, 2019, at the annual Livingston Awards luncheon in New York City. The awards bolster the work of young reporters, create the next generation of journalism leaders and mentors, and advance civic engagement around powerful storytelling. "Local Reporting" finalists named alongside Smith and Wells include journalists from the San Francisco Chronicle, The Chicago Tribune, and The Washington Post.
Believed is an award winning podcast collaboration from Michigan Radio and NPR that sought to share the stories of the survivors and families impacted by Larry Nassar's victimization of young women and athletes over a span of more than 20 years.
"Each year the Livingston Awards finalists remind us of the essential role journalism plays not simply in documenting facts, but in helping us all to understand, question and experience the complex issues of our times," said Wallace House Director Lynette Clemetson. "Through excellence in reporting and creativity in storytelling these finalists moved the narrative on stories dominating the headlines and those that were largely unknown."
The Livingston Awards for Young Journalists and the University of Michigan announced today the 2019 finalists in local, national and international reporting. The awards honor the best reporting and storytelling by journalists under the age of 35 across all forms of journalism. The 55 finalist selections were chosen from more than 400 entries.
Station Newsawards

redpajama_set_name: RedPajamaCommonCrawl


text:
Ricky Ian Gordon's all-star cast of his opera "Grapes of Wrath" received plenty of press coverage. Fortunately for followers of this site, there were also plenty of pictures, because the cast included two of the hottest barihunks in the world today: Nathan Gunn and Matthew Worth.
[Elizabeth Futral, Christine Ebersole, Victoria Clark, Nathan Gunn, Jane Fonda, Ricky Ian Gordon, Stephen Powell, and Matthew Worth - photos © Tristan Fuge]
HERE is what Martin Denton had to say in the NYTHEATER blog.
[Photo Credit: Monica Simoes]
Read the review from Backstage HERE.
Anthony Tommasini in the New York Times wrote:
"The baritone Nathan Gunn sang the lead role of Tom Joad with his trademark robust sound, unerring dramatic instinct and charisma."
Read the entire review HERE.
The above photo is of Barihunks favorite Jesse Blumberg in the original production at the Minnesota Opera. Blumberg will return to the Minnesota Opera to perform in Ricky Ian Gordon's latest opera "The Garden of the Finzi-Continis," which opens April 16, 2011.
Labels: grapes of wrath, Jesse Blumberg, matthew worth, nathan gunn, Ricky Ian Gordon
Susan March 30, 2010 at 8:03 AM
Hi, I was lucky enough to attend this with a seat in the 4th row center. The "barihunks" and the rest of the cast were great. It was very moving. Thanks for posting the links to the reviews.


text:
A Look Into How The Mask Lift Affects Students
Cashius Perry
The County announced that on February 12 2022, students and staff weren't required to wear masks anymore. This stirred up a lot of conversation about the mask lift. In this story, I will be showing perspectives of two people from the spectrum.
Evan Debell(9) does not wear a mask.
Evan Debell
When you heard that you weren't required to wear a mask anymore what was your reaction?
"I was like, wow, because it felt so soon, But I felt like it wasn't going to last long because people can be irresponsible when they're wearing no masks, like abusing their power."
Do you Prefer to wear a mask or not?
"I prefer not to wear a mask, I just prefer it because I like to breathe properly"
Are you afraid you might catch anything such as COVID-19?
"I already caught COVID once, but if I get it again, then oh well."
Do you agree with people who wear masks?
"I full heartedly agree with them, I see why they do it and that's their point of view on the situation, I just personally do not like to wear a mask, I'm not against wearing masks I would wear a mask in public if like anyone asks me to wear one, but I just don't want to wear a mask.
How would you feel if we had to go back to wearing masks?
"I would not really mind or care if I had to wear a mask again.
" I felt like I was still going to wear a mask because COVID-19 is still a thing and people can still catch it."
"I prefer to wear a mask because my mom is 50 and y'know she can get sick from something like COVID-19 really easily, My family also feels the same way about mask
"No because I have always been wearing a mask"
"I don't really care what other people do with their bodies, like it's really not any of my personal business, they can not wear a mask if they don't want to, I just feel a little uncomfortable when people with no masks come close to me.
"I wouldn't mind honestly, because I have still been wearing my mask"
Arvada Argos • Copyright 2023 • FLEX WordPress Theme by SNO • Log in


Don't get me wrong, I love Amazon. I shop on Amazon several times a month, sometimes even several times a week, but I never buy cloth diapers there. I like to support the cloth diaper community by supporting cloth diaper shops and the moms and women who own them, but since some cloth diaper shops and brands also sell on Amazon, it's even more than supporting small businesses. There is a bigger reason why I don't buy cloth diapers on Amazon.
When it comes to cloth diapers, you can get more bang for your buck elsewhere. There is no denying that Amazon has amazing deals on almost everything. When I'm shopping I often check my Amazon app to see if it's cheaper there and nine times out of ten, it is. But not cloth diapers. I'm not just talking about the sticker price of the diaper, either. Here, let me show you.
A lot of times, the sticker price is actually more on Amazon than a cloth diaper retailer like Diaper Junction, shown above. But that's not all . . .
What about Amazon Prime free shipping?
Yes, Amazon Prime is an amazing thing. I love Amazon Prime, but there are plenty of cloth diaper retailers that either always have free shipping or low threshold shipping that is easy to meet with a small order. See my list of cloth diaper stores with free shipping to find out which ones ship for free.
Amazon doesn't give you rewards and freebies.
Once you buy your more expensive cloth diapers on Amazon, they aren't going to reward you for your purchase, but a cloth diaper retailer will. Most cloth diaper retailers have a rewards system where you earn points for every purchase and when you reach a certain amount, they will give you free money to shop with. Hello! Free diapers, y'all! You won't get free diapers from Amazon, that's for sure.
Speaking of free diapers, many cloth diaper stores give you freebies with a minimum purchase. This could be a sample of diaper cream all the way up to a free diaper. I also have a list of cloth diaper stores that offer freebies.
So while I have a lot of love for Amazon and Amazon Prime, you are better off buying your cloth diapers from a cloth diaper retailer. Some of my favorites are Diaper Junction, Nicki's Diapers, Kelly's Closet, Sweetbottoms Baby, and Dearest Diapers.
The 90s. What Were We Thinking?!
I have bought a few diapers on Amazon, but the sales on smaller diaper shops are usually much better. I really love Nicki's Diapers for my cloth diaper addiction.
You make some really good points here! Another thing you get from diaper retailers (and not Amazon) is help if you have any cloth diapering questions or run into a problem.
Really? To think I like buying cloth diapers from Amazon.
I"m so bummed I found this out after completing my stash. I would've had plenty of rewards from so many small shops, but from now on I even look for kids toys or baby feeding items from these shops so I can support them.
Personally, I LOVE buying cloth diapers off of Amazon! We used my in laws Amazon prime account and not only got free shipping but we also got a HUGE discount on the actual price. We paid less than $200 for 24 one size snaps pocket diapers with their inserts, a wetbag, and a diaper pail liner. I also love Amazon because you get to read honest reviews. The customers don't know the sellers so don't feel the need to help them sell their product. AND with Amazon, if there was a problem with the diapers, which there weren't, we could easily return them without any problems. I will ALWAYS buy from Amazon.
This is all good info, and I agree for the most part. I will, however, say from experience that buying from Amazon can be a great choice if you have friends and family who are (were?) extraordinarily negative about cloth diapering but who will give you Amazon gift cards (since they definitely won't be bothered to get certificates from KC or Nicki's).
My family meant well, but every single one of them told me I was crazy and that I wouldn't last a month. They DID, however, get me a lot of Amazon gift cards for my baby shower and I managed to snag the vast majority of my stash from my Amazon Registry using gift cards and my completion discount (mainly Osocozy prefolds, Thirsties covers, some BG 4.0's, and Planetwise wet bags, so not the "China Cheapies").
From there though, most of my other purchases along the way were from Kelly's Closet and Nicki's Diapers and you're right that the discounts and rewards points can be very worth it (plus I have major love for Nicki's covers). Ultimately, it all boils down to examining your buying choices and making the most informed and cost-effective choice for you.


text:
Turbulent month roils football program: Suspensions, boycott, protest, firings
A Sept. sexual assault allegation spurred a U Title IX investigation, the suspension of 10 football players and a month of unrest.
By Jessie Bekker
Chris Dang
Senior wide receiver Drew Wolitarsky addresses reporters at a news conference as his teammates fill the background Thursday, Dec. 15 at the Gibson-Nagurski Football Complex in Minneapolis.
A woman reported a sexual assault to the Minneapolis Police Department four months ago, and a storm ensued, roiling the University of Minnesota's Athletics Department over winter break.
Prior to the suspension of 10 University of Minnesota football players connected to the alleged assault, restraining orders were served and lifted, and angry reactions from Gophers players spawned a turnover in team leadership.
Now, the team will kick off their 2017 season under P.J. Fleck, former Western Michigan University head coach who, at 36, will be the youngest to lead a team in the Power 5 conferences and will be the highest-paid head coach in University history at $18 million over five years.
It's the latest update since the team staged a less-than-48-hour boycott of all football activities, "in solidarity," they said, with their 10 "brothers" who they believe were unfairly suspended from the team in connection with the alleged Sept. 2 assault.
The boycott, publically supported by many on the coaching staff, pitted the team against the University's administration — which stood by its decision to suspend the players after an internal University investigation of the incident — and victim-survivors and advocates.
After the alleged assault, the victim-survivor, a University football game-day employee and student, reported the incident to Minneapolis police on Sept. 3.
News broke on Sept. 12 that four football players — KiAnte Hardin, Ray Buford, Tamarion Johnson and Dior Johnson — were being investigated by Minneapolis police.
Former head coach Tracy Claeys suspended the players for violating team rules.
But no arrests were made, and one month later, the Hennepin County attorney's office announced it wouldn't pursue charges against the four players.
On Oct. 4, Claeys lifted the players' suspensions. But two weeks later, the four players, plus an additional — Carlton Djam — were served with restraining orders from the victim-survivor, barring them from playing in home games.
On Oct. 22, Kiondre Thomas, a sixth player, picked up a two-day restraining order. The six were barred from playing against Rutgers at TCF Bank Stadium.
The six appeared in Hennepin County District Court Tuesday, Oct. 25, though only five still carried restraining orders. Lee Hutton, their attorney, said he would pursue the dismissal of one restraining order as possible grounds for dropping the others.
By Nov. 2, the alleged victim-survivor and football players reached a settlement. The five remaining restraining orders were dropped, on grounds that the football players would stay at least 20 feet away from the woman.
After that, the case left civil court.
The Gophers continued their season with the accused allowed to play again. On Sunday, Dec. 4, the team was selected to play Washington State in the Holiday Bowl on Dec. 27 in San Diego.
The University announced Dec. 13 that (the six) players, minus Thomas and plus another five — Seth Green, Kobe McCrary, Antonio Shenault, Mark Williams and Antoine Winfield Jr. — were suspended from the team.
The school's Office of Equal Opportunity and Affirmative Action (EOAA) had completed an investigation into the players and the alleged sexual assault. The University wouldn't release more information at the time, but the 10 players were barred from playing in the Dec. 27 Holiday Bowl.
Claeys didn't speak publicly on the suspensions at the time, and at a Dec. 14 news conference, Athletics Director Mark Coyle said student privacy laws prevent him (meaning Coyle) from commenting any further on the suspensions.
The next day, the team announced its boycott because they felt that their teammates had been treated unfairly.
"We're concerned that our brothers have been named publicly with reckless disregard in violation of their constitutional rights," senior wide receiver Drew Wolitarsky said in a prepared statement at a Dec. 15 news conference. "This effort is by players and for players."
The entire team congregated at the University of Minnesota Gibson-Nagurski Football Complex, where they requested a private meeting with Board of Regents members Michael Hsu and Darrin Rosha, and a reversal of the players' suspensions.
At the conference — despite federal requirements that schools investigate sexual assault reports — Wolitarsky called the Title IX investigation "unjust."
On social media, players and victim-survivor advocates alike expressed their beliefs.
Using the hashtag #WeHadEnough, players responded to the suspensions.
Claeys, along with defensive coordinator Jay Sawvel tweeted their support for the team. Both have since been fired.
"Have never been more proud of our kids. I respect their rights & support their effort to make a better world!" Claeys tweeted Dec. 15. The tweet received over 1,000 likes.
Players and University administrators kept their dealings largely under wraps the next day. Members of the team met with regent members and University of Minnesota President Eric Kaler. Coyle and Kaler wrote an open letter to student athletes, stating "certain behavior is simply unacceptable and antithetical to our institutional values."
Kaler released a campus-wide statement the same day. It said upholding "institutional values" was "far more important than any football game."
Local ABC affiliate KSTP-TV released the 84-page EOAA report, which detailed the victim-survivor's account of the alleged assault. The University found it "more likely than not" that five of the football players committed sexual assault and sexual harassment, and another five committed sexual harassment.
The team called off their boycott at a 9 a.m. news conference the next day, Dec. 17. They continued to press for a "fair hearing" for their 10 teammates and promised to tackle sexual assault and violence as a team.
"Sexual harassment and violence against women have no place on this campus, on our team, in our society, and at no time is it ever condoned," Wolitarsky said, adding that the team recognized a difference between a "legal threshold" and a "moral threshold."
The team also requested a hearing process through the University's Office for Student Conduct and Academic Integrity, which, based on the EOAA report, recommended school expulsions for five of the players — Ray Buford, Carlton Djam, Dior Johnson, Tamarion Johnson and KiAnte Hardin — one-year suspensions for Seth Green, Kobe McCrary, Mark Williams and Antoine Winfield Jr., and probation for Antonio Shenault.
About 250 demonstrators gathered outside TCF Bank Stadium that day to show solidarity with the victim-survivor. The protest was planned in advance of the boycott.
Claeys spoke Dec. 18 in front of reporters for the first time since the start of the boycott, stating on multiple occasions his team boycotted to achieve "due process" for their 10 teammates.
Claeys admitted a lack of understanding of the University's disciplinary processes, adding that all University staff and students should receive education on the differences between the school's student conduct code and criminal law.
"We have to do a lot better — I have to do a lot better — on being trained on all those processes," Claeys said.
Higher education institutions are federally required to investigate sexual misconduct reports using different standards and a lower burden of proof than the U.S. criminal justice system.
And with the federal government's pressure on schools to clamp down on sexual misconduct, it's become increasingly common (cannot access article) — and controversial — for colleges and universities to sanction accused students for sex offenses, even if a criminal investigation or prosecution of the same allegation results in no charges or a not guilty verdict in court.
The Gophers went on to defeat Washington State in the Holiday Bowl 17-12 without the team's 10 suspended players. Claeys didn't address the status of his contract at the time but was fired Jan. 3.
P.J. Fleck's hiring was announced three days later. An energetic Fleck said in a news conference he "eats difficult conversations for breakfast and that is why I took this job."


along with a hard-hitting, physical presence.
next week, added three assists and a goal.
who appeared helpless as seven of the Womp Rats' eight skaters lit the lamp.
they'll have a productive season, even if they go 0-10."
used a lightning-quick "spin-o-rama" move to advance the puck at center ice.
had a goal and an assist in the contest.
deking the goalie out of position before slipping the puck in low.
ice, resulting in a violent collision. No penalty was called.


Regular readers of my blog might remember that I moved more and more content and fuctionality from facebook to my own website during the last years, simply because I'm not comfortable with facebook's handling of privacy, it's usage of user data and now what it does or plans to do with the users' photos. I will keep my facebook account but all my content will be on my own website and just be shared to facebook - which gives facebook much less power over my stuff.
All my personal photos are now here and the galleries for my photography hobby are here.


text:
Wolf Patrol
paws on the ground
Wolves in North America
Ali Cat Leeds- Run Together
Title: Run Together
Artist: Ali Cat Leeds
Medium: Screen print and letterpress on paper
Dimensions: 10″ x 8″
Price: $15 (includes shipping within the US)
entangledroots.com
SPECIAL NOTE: Due to the artist being on an artist-residence overseas, artworks will be shipped in May.
Artist bio: Ali Cat. Leeds was born in St. Helena, California. She spent her formative years learning to draw under the drafting table of her mother who encouraged her daughter's pursuit of art. Ali received her BFA at Pacific Northwest College of Art in Portland, Oregon where she now lives and works as a printmaker. Her prints mingle the literal and metaphorical to illuminate and comment upon the world around us. Relief, screen, and letterpress prints span from the carnage of clear-cuts to the beauty of peoples movements. Ali mentored under master printer Paul Mullowney and her work has been featured in The Public Eye Magazine, Certain Days Calendar, The Siren Nation Festival, and Just Seeds. She recently completed an artist-residency at Proyecto Ace in Buenos Aires, Argentina and now prints at Flight 64, a member-run, nonprofit print studio.
Click to Donate Now!
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CYcd93chbQI
Wolf Patrol on Facebook
Click to view...
events fundraiser media releases news articles photos Uncategorized updates videos


Online registrations are about to close for the Māori Party Hui a Tau (Annual General Meeting) this Saturday (17 February 2018) in Rotorua. This hui heralds a new beginning for our party. We welcome registrations from our party membership and non-members who are passionate about Māori political independence.


text:
social-media-sprite-with-css3-rollover-effect
=============================================

using less css

redpajama_set_name: RedPajamaGithub


text:
SportsMixed Martial Arts
By Newsday.com sports@newsday.com Updated November 5, 2017 1:24 AM
In the main event of UFC 217, Georges St. Pierre looks to take the middleweight title from Michael Bisping on Saturday, Nov. 4, 2017 at Madison Square Garden.
Credit: Mario Gonzalez
Rose Namajunas celebrates her first-round knockout for the upset win over Joanna Jedrzejczyk to win the strawweight title at UFC 217 at Madison Square Garden on Nov. 4, 2017.
Rose Namajunas, right, and Joanna Jedrzejczyk meet for instructions from referee John McCarthy before the start of their strawweight title fight at UFC 217 at Madison Square Garden on Nov. 4, 2017. Namajunas took the title with a first-round knockout for the upset win.
Rose Namajunas (blue shorts) and Joanna Jedrzejczyk exchange punches in their strawweight title fight at UFC 217 at Madison Square Garden on Nov. 4, 2017. Namajunas won the title in an upset first-round knockout.
Georges St-Pierre beat Michael Bisping via third-round submission for the middleweight title at UFC 217 at Madison Square Garden on Nov. 4, 2017.
Georges St-Pierre defeated Michael Bisping to win the middleweight title at UFC 217 at Madison Square Garden on Nov. 4, 2017.
Georges St-Pierre celebrates beating Michael Bisping via third-round submission for the middleweight title at UFC 217 at Madison Square Garden on Nov. 4, 2017.
UFC president Dana White puts the middleweight title belt around Georges St-Pierre after he won it from Michael Bisping at UFC 217 at Madison Square Garden on Nov. 4, 2017.
Cody Garbrandt, left, and TJ Dillashaw fight for the bantamweight title at UFC 217 at Madison Square Garden on Nov. 4, 2017. Dillashaw became the new champion with a second-round TKO of Garbrandt.
TJ Dillashaw celebrates winning the bantamweight title from rival and former teammate Cody Garbrandt at UFC 217 at Madison Square Garden on Nov. 4, 2017.
Rose Namajunas won the strawweight title at UFC 217 with a first-round knockout of Joanna Jedrzejczyk at Madison Square Garden on Nov. 4, 2017.
Rose Namajunas gets emotional as Dana White presents her the strawweight title after her upset first-round knockout of Joanna Jedrzejczyk at UFC 217 at Madison Square Garden on Nov. 4, 2017.
Randy Brown (right) defeats Mickey Gall by unanimous decision in a welterweight bout at UFC 217 at Madison Square Garden on Saturday, Nov. 4, 2017.
Randy Brown (left) defeats Mickey Gall by unanimous decision in a welterweight bout at UFC 217 at Madison Square Garden on Saturday, Nov. 4, 2017.
Randy Brown defeats Mickey Gall (not shown) by unanimous decision in a welterweight bout at UFC 217 at Madison Square Garden on Saturday, Nov. 4, 2017.
Credit: AP / Frank Franklin II
Ricardo Ramos, of Brazil, celebrates after knocking out Aiemann Zahabi, of Canada, to win a bantamweight mixed martial arts bout at UFC 217 Saturday, Nov. 4, 2017, in New York.
Ricardo Ramos, of Brazil, celebrates after knocking out Aiemann Zahabi, of Canada, to win a bantamweight mixed martial arts bout at UFC 217 on Saturday, Nov. 4, 2017, in New York.
Curtis Blaydes, left, fights Aleksei Oleinik during a heavyweight mixed martial arts bout at UFC 217, Saturday, Nov. 4, 2017, in New York. Blaydes won the fight.
Credit: Getty Images / Mike Stobe
Ricardo Ramos of Brazil headlocks Aiemann Zahabi of Canada in their bantamweight bout during the UFC 217 event at Madison Square Garden on Nov. 4, 2017.
Curtis Blaydes lands a punch against Aleksei Oleinik of Russia in their heavyweight bout during the UFC 217 event at Madison Square Garden on Nov. 4, 2017.
Ricardo Ramos, left, of Brazil, fights Aiemann Zahabi, of Canada, during a bantamweight mixed martial arts bout at UFC 217, Saturday, Nov. 4, 2017, in New York. Ramos won the fight.
Aleksei Oleinik, of Russia, reacts during a heavyweight mixed martial arts bout against Curtis Blaydes at UFC 217, Saturday, Nov. 4, 2017, in New York. Blaydes won the fight.
Curtis Blaydes slams Aleksei Oleinik of Russia in their heavyweight bout during the UFC 217 event at Madison Square Garden on Nov. 4, 2017.
Ricardo Ramos of Brazil throws a punch on top of Aiemann Zahabi of Canada in their bantamweight bout during the UFC 217 event at Madison Square Garden on Nov. 4, 2017.
By Newsday.com sports@newsday.com
Brawl in stands leads to suspension of high school game
Top 10 MMA pound-for-pound fighter rankings
Beltran, Mets part ways amid Astros' cheating scandal
Evan Roberts started talking sports in his LI bedroom. Now he hosts afternoon drive on WFAN.
Lennon: Will Brodie stand by Beltran in wake of scandal?
UFC 246 fight week photos
McGregor finds 'consistency and structure' ahead of UFC 246
1:38 WATCH NOW UFC 246 predictions: McGregor vs. Cerrone
2:05 WATCH NOW Newsday Live event hosts Long Island UFC fighters
1:10:48 + FOR OUR SUBSCRIBERS 'I can't be broken': LI's MMA fighters on their mindset in the cage
LI's Serra, Weidman and Sterling talk highs and lows of MMA
3:29 UFC 246 fight card: Conor vs. Cowboy
2:10 + FOR OUR SUBSCRIBERS Newsday's Lennon reveals his 2020 Hall of Fame ballot
2:10 + FOR OUR SUBSCRIBERS David Lennon's Baseball Hall of Fame ballot 2020
Leiter enjoying life after being analyst on YES
Smoltz calls Cole deal a 'defining franchise move' for Yanks
3:12 + FOR OUR SUBSCRIBERS Evan Roberts started talking sports in his LI bedroom. Now he hosts afternoon drive on WFAN.
Kyrie sees 'pretty glaring' needs for Nets after loss


I Will Pay Any Sugar Boy N95k If You Agree To Service Me Well, a beautiful but matured Sugar Mummy Amanda Promise. We've been sharing lots of Sugar Mummies here on this website, and we'll continue connecting Young guys who are ready to start dating these Women.
These Women are rich and have everything else, the ONLY thing lacking is a man that will make them feel young again.Here is a message sent to us via our Secret Sugar Mummy on Whatsapp group. I am Amanda from Port Harcourt, Rivers State and I visit this site just to look for a strong and Handsome young boy who can service me well.
HEY BEAUTIFUL. how was your day ? It&#****;s nice to hear from you. I hope you are having a nice time as for me am cool and lonely. You sound nice and am very glad that I be ***e interested in each other. I do believe that we both have to be open hearts and well. Share our loneliness and love together if takes ***munication trust. Understanding and forgiveness will be made. Misunderstandings will occur but if the foundation is strong enough the relationship will over ***e others barriers.
My name is Zuber from Ethiopia Single no have kids never married. I find very much peace and tranquillity there . Am mentally stable physically fit a bunch of laughs warm. Very loving. Strong in bed. GOD fearing. Honest. Caring. Have a good sense of humour. I really easy person to talk and good listener. Am a family oriented person and there is more. But if would be better for you to find something&#****;s out for yourself. Am very happy about you and sincere so as to know each other well. I really want BUILD strong foundation of relationship with you from my side. But I want to know your interests and anything else.
QUEEN believe me I want to be with you and I really love you will be filled with substance quality spirituality and potential. I like to kiss and hug and cuddle. I want you to know that I need someone who wants only one women in his arms and I will be faithful to you and be there when you need an ear that listens. Kissing you least expect it. I want you to know that I need someone who believes in the power of friendship and that like anything else. Friendship require work and understanding honest. Faithful caring person for friendship or Marriage LOVELY.
So i want you take my whatsapp number or E-mail address from sugarmummyline agent and contact me for more we discusses there HONEY. If you interests.
Ok am ready for her.
Hi pretty mama amanda i am bidam from nigeria stays in lagos relocanting to ph will not be a proble if you wish i will be loyal to you and respect you contact me zero seven zero six zero eight two three nine nine nine.
I will do very well.
Hi&#****;, I&#****;m Bright by name, about *.**cm tall,I will give you all the satisfaction you want only if you can kindly contact me with+*************/br*d@*****.***. I&#****;m a strong, healthy young man but withe a baby face who lives in Lagos.
SWEETHEART YOU KNOW HOW YOU GET MY HEART ? PLEASE IF YOU LOVES GOD SEND ME YOUR PHONE NUMBER. BECAUSE I WANT YOU MEET ME IF YOU INTERESTS. AND I LOVE YOU SO MUCH EVEN OVER MYSELF HONEY.
MY QUEEN LOVE. AM AGREE WHATEVER YOU SAY. BUT FROM MY SIDE I DON&#****;T WANT ANY PAYMENT FROM YOU LOVELY. I WANT ONLY YOUR REAL LOVE. GIVE ME YOUR HEART FOR GOOD OUR STRONG FOUNDATION OF RELATIONSHIP HONEY. AM VERY VERY VERY LOVING YOU FROM INSIDE OF MY HEART MY BOSS.
I have got your message & you asked me that how long can you last in bed&#****;. I reply to you&#****;. I can live * hour in bed with my class mate in ****&#****; I had enjoyed with her in ****&#****;after I don&#****;t enjoy with anygirl.. I want with you enjoy whole night&#****; dear. I will satisfy whole night if you want me. I will satisfy you physically. I kiss you your warm your lips and others warm body&#****;s private parts and hugs, cuddle till morning?. I don&#****;t leave you alone from me till morning.
U message me or email me my WhatsApp number or email address.
Hi Amanda, I am very much interested in you for a serious relationship. I lives in Liberia. I always be there to service you well. If you are very much serious, I will be awaiting your response very soon.
AMANDA SWEETHEART . ***pliment of the day to you and all around you for your kind response. It was so impressing to my expectation. Am very happy about you and sincere so as to know each other well. Am really seeking a true love relationship and i pray if you Will show me love with trust. We both will live forever as one. Am ready to be yours and believe in real love from the heart. I need that special women in my life with a loving heart to me.
MY QUEEN am very ***fortable. Am optimistic and active kind and Honest person with a good sense of humour. Am seeking for a soul mate. Am seeking for open women who is ready for marriage. Am looking for a ***mitted partner who is ready to care and love me. Am a person who has a very strong desire for a series relationship. It&#****;s so great to be together and love i hope.
BEAUTIFUL AMANDA i want you meet me on my private WhatsApp number. Plus two five one nine one two six six three three three four. please don&#****;t ignore my message and discusses with me because am so much hot and loving you MY BOSS LOVE.


Hub and spoke SEO technology?
Thanks to SeoSamba's exclusive SEO technology (patent-pending), you can build compelling search engine-optimized websites, and manage online marketing on a large scale while selectively allowing front-end edition through an easy-to-use content management system.
SeoSamba hub and spoke SEO technology is composed of a cloud-based Software as a Service (SaaS) that connects to an unlimited number of self-reliant, remotely hosted websites locally powered by the #1 acclaimed - as ranked by the well respected opensourcecms.com website - open source CMS SeoToaster.
There is no hardware or software to purchase. Should you need one, we provide optimized, reliable, secure and cost-effective hosting for your website upon simple request.
Build web sites using web standard XHTML/W3C/CSS and integrates easily with any application.
Optimize and automates all on-site SEO factors routines.
Handles an ever-increasing number of off-site SEO factors: Automated linking across web sites, automated deep-linking, RSS feeds, news distribution, press release distribution, etc.
Includes a proven, open source and e-commerce ready web-based content management system with an unlimited users license, customized to support SeoSamba.
Connect with best-of-breed applications you already use such as Constant Contact and Salesforce.com.
Even if your current web site is dynamic or features a shopping cart, you can still take advantage of SeoSamba's features set by purchasing our QuickStart Search Engine Optimization services.
Integrates out-of-the-box modules for universal searches, such as for Google News: see below.
Manage web sites by project and apply linking strategies and changes across multiple domains.
Format content using a powerful, open source, and very easy-to-use content management system which allows for virtually unlimited dynamic application integration.
The user management feature allows for the creation and management of any number of web site managers for content creation and update processes.
Build search engine-friendly URLs–in plain English.
Automated description and keywords meta tags creation.
Automated optimization of page titles, headers, navigation links, media tags, etc.
Automated internal and external deep linking. Save time and improve ranking with our deep linking technology, which allows for auto linking of targeted keywords/phrases to the most appropriate pages across one or multiple domains.
Manage web site lifecycles with SEO-compliant 301 page redirects. 301s are automatically generated upon content moves, as well as web site porting.
Automatically creates Java Script based links and content silos across your entire portfolio of websites with a simple point and click interface.
Automatically creates XML site map.
Manage and apply SEO rules across all or any number of projects/domains/sections/pages with a single click.
Complete hosting flexibility that augments cross-domain linking value. Your web site can be hosted close to the market it caters to. SEO Samba-powered sites require a standard configuration found at Hostgator, Godaddy, 1and1 and others.
Google News and Yahoo News offer a great way to promote web sites through a variety of online channels. Put simply, it can boost a web site's authority. It also allows reputation management SEO professionals to index pages within two minutes of their publication. Thanks to SEO Samba, you can easily meet all of Google News' stringent requirements, as well as those of other news aggregators inlcuding Yahoo News, and compete for your share of the prime universal search ranking's real estate. This is an ideal tool for online reputation management and online PR companies.
Generate search engine-optimized news automatically based on chosen SEO best practices.
Maximize exposure through social bookmarking, news aggregation, including Google News, RSS feeds distribution, email marketing and more.
Retain hard-earned traffic with a search-friendly news archive.
Create HTML and text-based versions of newsletters easily, then send them using your current email marketing application ( Constant Contact Vertical Response Emma etc...).
Automated search spider-friendly news scroller creation.
Unlimited number of news categories.
Automated RSS creation for each news category.
Track RSS subscription in a search engine-friendly way with embedded gifs.
Automatically creates news items XML sitemap and upload it to Google.
Aggregate news items across web sites to create unique newsletters and market to a cross-segment of your email list, then save these newsletters with one click to any of your web sites.
When your news is in fact a Press Release SEO Samba takes it straight from your news section and distributes it automatically for free as part of your subscription services. Your small businesses is now free to communicate at will, augment sales leads, build inbound links to your website, and command attention from journalists and the blogosphere. It's as easy as logging into your SEO Samba account, going to your news module, and creating your press release. Click one checkbox, select a cross-section of market and industries, and your press release is on its way to a wide range of news aggregators and resources.
and NewsNow among many others.
Single sign-on, log directly into SEO Samba with your Google Account.
Automatically creates both web and news XML sitemap and upload them to your Google Webmaster Tools account.
Pulls automatically your websites status into a dashboard along with the date stamp when Google last crawled your sites. This information is also available to agencies across their entire client portfolio.
Add Google Analytics code to your website automatically.
Verify your robots.txt file prior to upload against Google robots.txt analysis tool.
Increases Google crawling rate automatically after each update to your websites.
Point and click, same screen integration with Google Optimizer. Create landing page experiments automatically, and terminate experiment gracefully thanks to our automated routing to your best performing pages.
Whether your existing web site is dynamic or static, corporate or e-commerce, we have crafted services packages to help you easily take advantage of the powerful features found in SEO Samba.
and Managed SEO services offerings.


text:
https://www.wsj.com/articles/big-tech-and-antitrust-a-path-forward-11608061980
Facebook CEO Mark Zuckerberg speaking remotely during a congressional antitrust hearing in July. He and other tech executives faced criticism from members of both parties. Graeme Jennings/Press Pool
Journal Reports: Year in Review
Big Tech and Antitrust: A Path Forward
With so much uncertainty, let's embrace a policy agenda that is premised on curiosity
By Matt Perault
Updated Dec. 16, 2020 8:00 am ET
As the debate over big tech and antitrust intensified over the past year, certainty reigned.
On one side are those who are certain that companies like Amazon, Apple, Facebook and Google are monopolies, dominant in individual markets like search, social networking, e-commerce and app stores. They are certain that mergers between companies like Facebook and Instagram reduced competition. And they're certain that antitrust law has calcified, unable to account for new technologies. As a recent report by the House Judiciary Committee claimed, "companies that once were scrappy, underdog startups…have become the kinds of monopolies we last saw in the era of oil barons and railroad tycoons."
On the other side of the debate are those who are certain that competition is flourishing in the tech sector, with innovation yielding great products at ever-lower prices, and companies like TikTok and Snap emerging to challenge incumbents. They are certain that mergers have benefited consumers. And they're certain that we don't need to re-examine antitrust doctrine because it's flexible enough to evolve with technology.
Why the U.S. Economy Will Take Off in 2021
Why Covid-19 Home-Based Testing Could Make All the Difference
How to Understand This Crazy Year in Investing—and What to Do Now
Will Coronavirus Be the Death of Cities? Not So Fast
Full Report (In print Dec. 17)
In the course of this debate, I've espoused my own certainties. When I worked for Facebook, it never felt like we could afford to be complacent. We faced real competitive threats. If I had shown up at a meeting and announced that Facebook didn't compete with Google, Apple or TikTok, I would have been laughed out of the room. And I saw Facebook's investment in developing new features for its Instagram and WhatsApp acquisitions and improving the safety, security and infrastructure of both products. So it's hard for me to reconcile my experience in the tech sector with the antitrust arguments now being waged against it.
But if November's election taught us anything, it's that our assumptions are often wrong. With polls predicting a blue-wave election that never materialized, predictions that seemed certain before the election now seem flimsy in the wake of it.
This uncertainty is jolting, but I believe it may end up being a win for antitrust policy. If Republicans hold on to their Senate majority after the Georgia runoffs in January, many on the left will be disappointed that divided government makes sweeping antitrust reform less likely, while many on the right will be wary of regulatory overreach by the Biden administration. But the mixed election results may force us to travel a more deliberative path that could lead to better policy.
Despite the forceful rhetoric of the antitrust debate, there's still much we don't know. One striking example is TikTok. While many people have argued that tech products should offer more privacy, higher-quality content and more human choice instead of algorithmic preferencing, TikTok emerged as a strong competitor even though it defaults to public sharing, is rife with salacious content and relies almost exclusively on algorithmic recommendations. TikTok's rise suggests that the conventional wisdom about tech products may be out of step with user preferences.
So how could we craft an antitrust policy agenda that takes this uncertainty into account?
Filling knowledge gaps
One path forward is to focus on learning. If policy makers are realistic about what they don't know, then they should pursue an antitrust agenda that's focused on filling these gaps and studying what policy measures work and why. Advocating for this type of regulatory curiosity isn't a call for inaction. Curiosity requires an active government, with policy makers implementing an aggressive agenda to learn quickly and efficiently.
First, policy makers should make it easier for platforms to share data with researchers studying competitive dynamics in the tech sector. The current system is unworkable. Academics routinely criticize platforms for restricting data access, while platforms face enormous risk when sharing data, even with academics.
To facilitate data sharing, policy makers should pass legislation providing a safe harbor to companies that share data consistent with privacy best practices. In addition, platforms should publicly report data that helps to evaluate whether existing antitrust law is working, such as regular reporting on merger performance, as Sen. Amy Klobuchar (D., Min.) has proposed.
Second, policy makers should embrace experimentation. Other governments have used "regulatory sandboxes" to test new policy frameworks that inform future product and policy design. And other industries, ranging from sports to medicine, have used experimentation to develop better products and policies. Sports has benefited from testing new rules in developmental leagues, and medicine uses clinical trials to gather information on efficacy and risk.
Twitter CEO Jack Dorsey testified remotely during a Senate hearing in September.
Photo: greg nash/press pool
In antitrust, experimentation could help us to better understand the impact of policy on competitiveness. One example is data portability, which is the ability to take data from one service to another. Portability has gained support from industry and a bipartisan group of lawmakers, including Rep. Ken Buck (R., Colo.) and Sen. Mark Warner (D., Va.). Yet the impact of portability on competitiveness remains murky. Although better portability could make it easier for people to leave established platforms for smaller ones, it might instead entrench large platforms by giving them access to user data at competing startups, and it could harm privacy if people transfer data to less secure services. With so much unknown, a regulatory sandbox on portability would help us to learn which policies work best.
Test it in court
Finally, a curious antitrust agenda might use litigation to fill in gaps in our understanding. We typically associate litigation with certainty, not curiosity: The government sues when it believes it's going to win. Wary of bringing cases it might lose, the Justice Department filed only one monopolization case from 2011 to 2019. As a result, tech antitrust jurisprudence still relies heavily on the Microsoft case, which was decided when software was distributed on CD-ROMs and dial-up modems were widespread.
As Avery Gardiner of the Center on Democracy and Technology explained to me recently, modernizing antitrust may require that government agencies bring more cases, even when a win isn't guaranteed. With the Justice Department filing a case against Google in October and the Federal Trade Commission and state attorneys general filing cases against Facebook last week, this reticence to litigate seems to be shifting.
What do you think should be done, if anything, in terms of regulating the big tech companies? Share your experience below.
That shift may be an important component of regulatory curiosity in antitrust, as the rigor of a court case—briefings by both sides, intensive economic analysis, scrutiny by judges—may help us to gather information that will shape our understanding of the tech sector, regardless of who prevails. Which products compete with each other? How should we measure quality? Is app-store pricing fair? What distinguishes acquisitions that benefit users from those that reduce choice?
Of course, litigation has significant downsides. It's an inefficient, expensive and slow pathway for learning, requiring each side to devote immense resources over several years. For many tech companies, shifting their focus from developing products to mounting a defense in court will have a measurable impact on the pace of innovation. And judges may lack the technical expertise to assess complex products, such as advertising technology or postmerger infrastructure improvements.
Those fears are real, and the costs are tangible. But even so, they may be worth bearing if we want to develop a better understanding of the competitiveness of the tech sector and the adequacy of existing antitrust law.
In the wake of an election that cast doubt on certainty, we should embrace an antitrust policy agenda premised on curiosity. We have a lot to learn.
Key Dates in 2020
• Feb. 11: The Federal Trade Commission orders big tech companies to provide detailed information about their acquisitions of fledgling firms over the past 10 years, seeking to determine whether the deals harmed competition.
• Oct. 20: The Justice Department files an antitrust lawsuit against Google, alleging it uses anticompetitive tactics to preserve a monopoly for its search engine and related advertising business.
• Oct. 29: Tech giants including Amazon, Facebook and Google report strong quarterly sales and profits as the pandemic drives demand.
• Nov. 10: The EU charges Amazon with violating competition law, alleging that the company uses nonpublic data it gathers from third-party sellers to unfairly compete against them.
• Dec. 9: The FTC and 46 states sue Facebook, accusing it of buying and freezing out small startups to choke competition. The federal case seeks to unwind Facebook's acquisitions of Instagram and WhatsApp.
Leaders in government and tech want to rewrite a law that governs the internet. WSJ explains Section 230, how it shaped the modern internet, and what lawmakers and tech executives want to change. Photo illustration: Carlos Waters/WSJ
Mr. Perault is the director of the Center on Science and Technology Policy at Duke University and an associate professor at Duke's Sanford School of Public Policy. He previously served as a director of public policy for Facebook. He can be reached at reports@wsj.com.
Appeared in the December 17, 2020, print edition as 'Big Tech The Domination Debate With so much uncertainty, let's embrace an antitrust policy agenda that is premised on curiosity.'
Next in Journal Reports: Year in Review
Fashion in 2020: Prabal Gurung on What This Year Will—and Won't—Change
By Ray A. Smith
Dec. 15, 2020 4:00 pm ET
The designer talks about sustainability, sweatpants, pajamas, runway shows and the future of luxury.
More Journal Reports: Year in Review Articles
Jeff Tweedy on Covid-19—and Its Impact on Live Music
By Jeff Slate
Francis Fukuyama on the State of Democracy in 2020 and Beyond
By Francis Fukuyama
Dec. 15, 2020 12:00 pm ET
For the Retail Industry, 2020 Was a Wild Ride
By Matt Rubel
JOURNAL REPORTS
Personal Investing


text:
/* The Good */

NSArray *names = @[@"Tom", @"Sebas", @"Andres", @"Gera", @"Pablo"];

NSDictionary *company = @{
                          @"name": @"Inaka",
                          @"slogan": @"it's inaka!"
                          };

NSNumber *shouldUseLiterals = @YES;

NSNumber *floorNumber = @1;

/* The Bad */

NSArray *names = [NSArray arrayWithObjects:@"Tom", @"Sebas", @"Andres", @"Gera", @"Pablo", nil];

NSDictionary *company = [NSDictionary dictionaryWithObjectsAndKeys:@"name", @"Inaka", @"slogan", @"it's inaka", nil];

NSNumber *shouldUseLiterals = [NSNumber numberWithBool:YES];

NSNumber *floorNumber = [NSNumber numberWithInteger:1];


Sometimes I browse Facebook with peter's account. I only do it to see what my family members are up to. I also enjoy reading my brother's informative page, One Body for Christ. They post great information on healthy lifestyles. Check it out at Facebook.com/onebodyforchrist. Today I saw that they posted this chart for people who think eating healthy has to be difficult. It's as easy as substituting healthy items for non healthy items. Check it out!
Good list! Thanks for sharing!!


text:
American Gods: The Moment of the Storm Arrives In April
January 29, 2019 by The Comic Book Critic
A STORM IS BREWING, AND NO ONE CAN ESCAPE IT
"American Gods: The Moment of the Storm" brings "American Gods" to its epic finale in April 2019
American Gods: The Moment of the Storm, the third and final installment of the American Gods saga, begins in April from Dark Horse. American Gods: The Moment of the Storm #1, by creators Neil Gaiman, P. Craig Russell, & Scott Hampton arrives on April 17th, 2019.
Neil Gaiman's story of Shadow, Wednesday, and the gods comes to its epic conclusion in American Gods: The Moment of the Storm. American Gods: The Moment of the Storm is the third and final installment in Dark Horse's American Gods saga, preceded by American Gods: My Ainsel and American Gods: Shadows.
The new and old gods agree to meet in the center of America to exchange the body of the old god's fallen leader—heading towards an inevitable and potentially catastrophic war in this final arc to the bestselling comic series!
American Gods, the Hugo, Bram Stoker, Locus, World Fantasy, and Nebula award–winning novel by #1 New York Times bestselling writer Neil Gaiman (Sandman, Neverwhere, Coraline, The Graveyard Book) has been adapted into a comic series by the incredibly talented writer and artist P. Craig Russell (The Graveyard Book, The Giver), with art and colors by award-winning artist Scott Hampton (Hellboy, Batman). American Gods: The Moment of the Storm features cover art by Glenn Fabry (Creepy Comics, Aliens Vs. Predator: Eternal) and Adam Brown (The Justice League, Aliens), with variant covers for each title by David Mack (Fight Club 2, Jessica Jones, Daredevil).
American Gods: The Moment of the Storm #1 arrives April 17, 2019, and is available for pre-order at your local comic shop.
Praise for American Gods: My Ainsel:
"The careful preservation of the voice of the original series will please Gaiman purists, and Hampton's atmospheric artwork is outstanding…. This is a suitably epic treatment of a grand saga, with art that brings enough new life to the popular fiction for its many followers to add to their collections–Publishers Weekly
"Bizarre, fantastical, and an adaptation long overdue, American Gods: My Ainsel sustains Gaiman's story in a new format. This is perfect for anyone who is a fan of the original book or the recent television series." –Bookriot
Praise for American Gods: Shadows:
"By staying true to its source material and retaining Gaiman's strong narrative voice, AMERICAN GODS #1 presents a stellar example of how to make an adaptation." –Comicverse
"If you're excited for the show and want to know what to expect from what looks like it could be the Next Big Thing on TV, make sure to pick this up." –IGN
Preview of American Gods: The Moment of the Storm #2
Preview – American Gods: My Ainsel #3 by Gaiman, Russell, & Hampton
Preview – American Gods: My Ainsel #1 by Gaiman, Russell, & Hampton (Dark Horse)
First Look at American Gods: Shadows #1 by Gaiman, Russell, & Hampton
Preview of American Gods: My Ainsel #8 by Gaiman, Russell, & Hampton
Categories News Tags 04/17/19, American Gods, American Gods: The Moment of the Storm, April 2019, Dark Horse, Neil Gaiman, news, P. Craig Russell, Scott Hampton Post navigation
Preview: Fight Club 3 #1 by Palahniuk & Stewart
Preview: Heroes In Crisis #5 By King & Mann (DC)


FROM TIME IMMEMORIAL, humankind has regarded it as a blessing to be fruitful and multiply.
A philosopher and bioethics instructor at Johns Hopkins University, Rieder was the focus of a recent NPR story, in which he argued that having children is immoral and should be discouraged with government penalties. It's not that Rieder dislikes children — in fact, he has a 2-year-old daughter of whom he's quite fond. But with "dangerous climate change" approaching a tipping point "very, very soon," he says, bringing more children into the world is unethical. After all, every additional baby means additional carbon emissions, and more carbon emissions mean rising global temperatures. Without drastic change, the planet will soon be "largely uninhabitable for humans." So the natural human urge to procreate, Rieder insists, must be suppressed.
Curiously, Rieder seems to believe he is saying something fresh and unusual. "Here's a provocative thought," he announces. "Maybe we should protect our kids by not having them."
Provocative? The notion that too many people are having kids, and that "overpopulation" spells doom for life on Earth, has been an article of faith among environmental extremists since at least the 1960s.
David Brower, the longtime executive director of the Sierra Club, insisted decades ago that childbearing should be "a punishable crime against society, unless the parents hold a government license." The current White House science adviser, physicist John Holdren, was writing in the 1970s about the catastrophe that would result if governments didn't turn to forcible sterilization, compulsory abortion, or anti-fertility drugs in the water supply to shrink the population. "If the population control measures are not initiated immediately and effectively," wrote Holdren in a book co-authored with ecologist/alarmist Paul Ehrlich, "all the technology man can bring to bear will not fend off the misery to come."
Babies are more than carbon footprints. They grow up not merely to consume, but to produce. With more people a society gets more innovation, more acts of kindness, more social welfare, more enterprise, more caregiving, more discovery, more prosperity. To say nothing of more entertainment, like the hit 1970s TV show, "The Waltons."
Population misanthropes were freaking out about the disasters sure to come from making too many babies as far back as ancient Greece. But though babies keep being made — at present, some 130 million of them every year — the disaster never comes. The number of men, women, and children on the planet has exploded from 2.5 billion in 1950 to 7.4 billion today, yet humanity is better off than ever. People live longer, healthier, and more comfortable lives than at any time in human history. By and large, they have more wealth, more education, more food, more medical care, more energy, and more natural resources than their forbears could have dreamed of.
Never have there been so many people in the world. Never have the world's people been so well off. Coincidence? Not at all. When people are fruitful and multiply, they tend to make the world better, not worse.
Population doomsayers get lots of attention, but the doom they predict invariably fails to materialize. That is because babies are more than carbon footprints. They grow up not merely to consume, but to produce. They think and create and explore and imagine — and they inspire others to do so as well. With more people a society gets more innovation, more acts of kindness, more social welfare, more enterprise, more caregiving, more discovery, more growth, more prosperity.
When parents bring a baby into the world, they do a wonderful thing — both for the baby and for the world. You really want to save the planet? Ignore the gloom-and-doomers, and have more children.


text:
Growing European investment in UK asset management industry underlines importance of a Brexit deal
The UK asset management industry grew to a record £7.7 trillion, maintaining its standing as the second largest asset management centre in the world, according to the latest figures* published today by the Investment Association (IA), the trade body that represents UK asset managers.Key 2017 findings*: £7.7 trillion managed by IA members in the UK - 11% increase from
Equities experience third month of outflows
The Investment Association's monthly statistics of UK investor behaviour in July 2018 show:
Net retail sales were positive in July with an additional £977 million invested into UK authorised funds, and funds under management totalling £1.3 trillion.Europe, North America, and UK equity funds experienced net retail outflows of £156 million, £256 million and £315
Investment Association appoints Head of European Affairs
The Investment Association (IA) has promoted Johannes Woelfing to the newly created position of Head of European Affairs as part of the trade association's move to increase its permanent presence in Brussels. Johannes, formerly Regulatory and Legal Specialist, has been with the IA for four years and will be the IA's main representative in Brussels as of 1 September 2018. He will be responsible
Low net retail sales reflect continued uncertainty
The Investment Association's monthly statistics of UK investor behaviour in June 2018 show:
Net retail sales were positive in June with an additional £840 million invested into UK authorised funds, and funds under management totalling £1.2 trillionGlobal was the best-selling sector in June with £291 million net retail salesEurope and UK equity funds each experienced
IA's Velocity Accelerator opens its doors to establish the first cohort of FinTech innovators
The Investment Association (IA) has today opened its doors to establish the first cohort of ground-breaking innovators for Velocity, the IA's specialist FinTech accelerator for the asset management industry. The 24-strong Velocity Advisory Panel, chaired by Graham Kellen, Chief Digital Officer of Schroders, and comprised of senior industry leaders and digital technology
Investment Association launches report to promote LGBT+ inclusivity in the asset management industry
The Investment Association (IA) has today published 'Bringing our Whole Selves to Work', the organisation's first report into the LGBT+ experience in asset management, which sets out twelve key steps organisations can take to create more inclusive workplaces.The publication of the report comes a day ahead of the Pride march in London and follows a roundtable discussion
UK equity funds experienced £1.2 billion outflow in May
The Investment Association's monthly statistics of UK investor behaviour in May 2018 show:Net retail sales were positive in May with an additional £1.9 billion invested into UK authorised funds, and funds under management totalling £1.2 trillionTargeted Absolute Return was the best-selling sector in May with £516 million net retails salesOutflows from UK equity funds
IA launches new campaign to promote diversity in the investment industry
The Investment Association (IA), the trade body that represents UK investment managers, has today expanded its Investment20/20 programme to promote a more diverse pool of talent into the investment industry, and has launched a video challenging stereotypes of the industry's workforce.The IA, which recently merged with Investment20/20 to help drive greater diversity in
Investment Association calls for new partnership in pension provision
The Investment Association (IA) today published a paper on Defined Contribution (DC) pensions, 'Putting Investment at the Heart of DC Pensions', highlighting the critical importance of investment management, alongside the need to increase pension contributions, if today's savers are to have a more secure and prosperous retirement. Auto-enrolment has been a
Sharp spike in director-related concerns at AGM halfway point
Shareholder concerns over director accountability are on the increase as pay remains high on the agenda at the midway point of the 2018 AGM season, according to new analysis by the Investment Association (IA), the trade body that represents UK investment managers whose 240 members collectively manage more than £6.9 trillion on behalf of clients.For those FTSE All-Share