We've got so much love for glamour, shine on in our twinkling Arianna dress! She features an all over bronze hue, a V neckline with a scalloped lace trim, narrow adjustable straps that lead to a cross back design. Her slim fit bodice leads to a form hugging floor length silhouette to sweep them off their feet! Arianna is composed of a lined scalloped lace fabric adorned with glitter accents. Dress offers a moderate stretch. Glitter will transfer.


With 140 attendees, the PTS Paper & Board Symposium stood its ground in the tough competition of European symposia. We are particularly pleased about the excellent feedback on the symposium's quality. This concerns the lectures and exhibition, the social programme and organization as a whole. We have compiled a short evaluation which you may download from the symposium website: >> Evaluation of the PTS Paper & Board Symposium.
The sponsors for their financial support – it would not have been possible to organize the event without them.
We hope that the quality of presentations and of the symposium as a whole have met your expectations and are looking forward to meeting you again at one of our coming events.


text:
BAKERSFIELD, CA – Billy Graham asked his close friend of 10 years, Don Wilton, to be his pastor and what followed was a privileged 25 years of sitting at the feet of one of God's pillar servants—nurturing a friendship and seeing a personal side of Billy that most people have never known, until now. "My relationship with Mr. Graham is close to my heart and humbling for me. It was a very unlikely friendship and how it happened is only by the grace of God," shares Don.
Don Wilton and Dr. Billy Graham
Don's recurring theme of describing Billy's private side is one of humility. He recounts his first personal encounter with Billy when he was invited by him and his wife Ruth to their home. To Don's surprise, he was treated like royalty. It was a moment stamped in Don's memory of a "nobody" who thought he was a "somebody" talking to a "somebody" who thought he was a "nobody." That day set the course for a life-long friendship between Don and, who he affectionately called, "Brother Billy." Don was invited back week after week, mostly on Saturdays, and they talked, prayed, laughed, and lived life as good friends do.
The Face of God's Grace
Billy's spirit of humility had never resided so richly in the heart of a man. He was America's Pastor—one of the world's most famous, well-known, and sought-after evangelists and preachers. "Anybody who was 'anybody' coming to the United States wanted to meet with Dr. Billy Graham," said Don. Yet, Billy considered himself the biggest sinner who perpetually reflected on his unworthiness.
The Bible says that God resists the proud, but gives grace to the humble. He will bless and give grace to those with a humble spirit and a servant's heart. "Mr. Graham showed me the face of God's grace." Don reflected.
Billy understood his unrighteousness—his sinfulness and fleshness as a human being. He wrote books and spoke from the depth of his depravity. No one would consider Dr. Billy Graham as a sinner, but he considered himself the chief of sinners. As his pastor and close friend, Don had the privilege of reflecting on these things together from the inside of Billy's eyes. "I held Mr. Graham's hand as he went to heaven," said Don. "Most people, the closer you get to them, the more you realize they have clay feet. But the closer I got to Mr. Graham, I recognized that he had this profound spiritual understanding that "by the grace of God, go I." He saw himself as the first recipient of the reconciliation of God."
There was not an ounce of pride in Billy.
Billy often shared his life's regrets with Don and reflected on what he wished he had done differently. One of his great regrets is not having studied enough. Billy said he wished he studied more and preached less. It was hard for him to turn down the countless speaking requests. The older Billy became, the less he felt he knew about the almightiness of a sovereign God. Don and Billy would talk for endless hours about the magnificence of God. "It was rather odd to me," Don explains. "Because it doesn't make sense. He had such a profound sense of God's order. But he was so profoundly desirous to get to the heartbeat of the unfathomable and, yet, palpable love of God."
Other regrets were centered on lost time with his family. "I heard him apologize to God for having been so busy preaching the gospel that he was away from family too much."
Billy repeatedly expressed to Don how he did not spend enough time with his family when they were growing up. "You cannot recapture those years," Bill would say. Billy would fly off to other countries for months at a time and always have a picture in his mind of his children waving goodbye from their beautiful home.
In learning the personal side of the beloved pastor, Dr. Billy Graham, we learn how he drew attention to Jesus throughout his entire life. Brother Billy's life reminds us how Jesus uses all of His children in unique ways to be His servants and further His Kingdom.
Don Wilton shares more about his dear friend, Dr. Billy Graham, in greater length and detail in episode 44 of The Influencers Podcast. Listen and subscribe today!
About CityServe
CityServe (www.cityserve.us) is a collaborative network of churches and community leaders who help those in need live better lives. CityServe empowers the local church to fulfill its purpose to overcome despair and transform lives by resourcing them with tangible goods and capacity building. CityServe brings the church to the table to address community challenges by offering long-lasting relationships that lead to transformation and has been designated a "Community of Faith and Opportunity" by the U.S. Department of Agriculture. For more information about CityServe and its initiatives, please visit https://cityserve.us or on social platforms @cityservehq.
CONTACT: Crissy Sanchez-Cochran, 661-472-7305 (mobile) or [email protected]
Read more news on Billy Graham, Christian Ministry and World Missions.
This entry was posted in News and tagged Christian News, Christian News Sources, Christian News Today, Christian News Websites, Christian Persecution, Christian Persecution News, Christian Persecution Today, Christian World News, Current Human Rights Issues, Define Social Injustice, Examples Of Social Injustice, Human Rights, Human Rights Topics, Latest Christian News, Persecution, Persecution of Christians, Religious Freedom, Religious Persecution, Social Injustice, Social Injustice Definition, Social Injustice Examples, Social Justice, Social Justice Issues, What Is Social Injustice, World Christian News. Bookmark the permalink.
Like? Share with your friends.FacebookGoogle PlusTwitterPinterestLinkedInEmail
Myanmar Elections Opens Way for the Gospel
Border Dispute Between India and Nepal Slows Down Spread of the Gospel
Hope in the Ashes of Boko Haram's West Africa Terrorism
Delhi Officials Scramble to Find Water During Shortage
Retreat Provides Inclusion and Acceptance for the Cooper Family

redpajama_set_name: RedPajamaCommonCrawl


text:
Q: Finalization of cursor error I've tried to close the cursor in db but then it says invalid call to the cursor object which has been closed as I'm getting a cursor in return...
  Cursor getDB(String date) {
    int idate = Integer.parseInt(date.substring(0, 2)) * 1000000
            + Integer.parseInt(date.substring(3, 5)) * 10000
            + Integer.parseInt(date.substring(6));

    ourHelper = new DbHelper(ourContext);
    ourDatabase = ourHelper.getReadableDatabase();

    Cursor cursor = ourDatabase.rawQuery("SELECT * FROM " + DATABASE_TABLE
            + " WHERE " + KEY_DATE + " = " + idate,// +
                                                    // " ORDER BY "
                                                    // +
                                                    // KEY_NAME
                                                    // +
                                                    // " ASC",
            null);
    if (cursor != null && cursor.getCount() > 0)
        return cursor;

    return null;
}

& this is how I'm using the cursor which I'm getting in return
I initialized them as
adapter = new MyAdapter1(Day_Book.this, ourCursor, false);
adapter2 = new MyAdapter2(Day_Book.this, ourCursor2, false);
case R.id.bShowDB:
        db = new DB(Day_Book.this);
        ourCursor = db.getDB(et1.getText().toString());
        adapter.changeCursor(ourCursor);
        adapter2.changeCursor(ourCursor);
        //ourCursor.close();
        db.close();
        lv1.setAdapter(adapter);
        lv2.setAdapter(adapter2);
        //ourCursor.close();
        break;

This is the error I'm getting..
01-17 00:12:41.134: E/Cursor(8724): Finalizing a Cursor that has not been deactivated or closed. database = /mnt/sdcard/JournalDB.db, table = null, query = SELECT * FROM    Contains_all_the_entries_of_an_year_of_a_particular_company WHERE  date = 17012013
01-17 00:12:41.134: E/Cursor(8724): android.database.sqlite.DatabaseObjectNotClosedException: Application did not close the cursor or database object that was opened here
01-17 00:12:41.134: E/Cursor(8724):     at android.database.sqlite.SQLiteCursor.<init>(SQLiteCursor.java:212)
01-17 00:12:41.134: E/Cursor(8724):     at android.database.sqlite.SQLiteDirectCursorDriver.query(SQLiteDirectCursorDriver.java:53)
01-17 00:12:41.134: E/Cursor(8724):     at android.database.sqlite.SQLiteDatabase.rawQueryWithFactory(SQLiteDatabase.java:1454)
01-17 00:12:41.134: E/Cursor(8724):     at android.database.sqlite.SQLiteDatabase.rawQuery(SQLiteDatabase.java:1424)
01-17 00:12:41.134: E/Cursor(8724):     at com.balance.start.JournalDB.getDayBook(DB.java:232)
01-17 00:12:41.134: E/Cursor(8724):     at com.balance.start.Day_Book.onClick(Book.java:93)
01-17 00:12:41.134: E/Cursor(8724):     at android.view.View.performClick(View.java:2408)
01-17 00:12:41.134: E/Cursor(8724):     at android.view.View$PerformClick.run(View.java:8816)
01-17 00:12:41.134: E/Cursor(8724):     at android.os.Handler.handleCallback(Handler.java:587)
01-17 00:12:41.134: E/Cursor(8724):     at android.os.Handler.dispatchMessage(Handler.java:92)
01-17 00:12:41.134: E/Cursor(8724):     at android.os.Looper.loop(Looper.java:123)
01-17 00:12:41.134: E/Cursor(8724):     at     android.app.ActivityThread.main(ActivityThread.java:4633)
01-17 00:12:41.134: E/Cursor(8724):     at java.lang.reflect.Method.invokeNative(Native Method)
01-17 00:12:41.134: E/Cursor(8724):     at java.lang.reflect.Method.invoke(Method.java:521)
01-17 00:12:41.134: E/Cursor(8724):     at com.android.internal.os.ZygoteInit$MethodAndArgsCaller.run(ZygoteInit.java:858)
01-17 00:12:41.134: E/Cursor(8724):     at com.android.internal.os.ZygoteInit.main(ZygoteInit.java:616)
01-17 00:12:41.134: E/Cursor(8724):     at dalvik.system.NativeStart.main(Native Method)

A: Hum, you are setting the same cursor twice for two different adapters:
adapter.changeCursor(ourCursor);
adapter2.changeCursor(ourCursor);

Maybe this is the source of the problem.

A: remove db.close(); from your switch case.
Do this in onDestroy().

redpajama_set_name: RedPajamaStackExchange


text:
Europe in Flux: Exploring Revolution and Migration in British Plays of the 1990s
Geoff Willcocks
Vice-Chancellor's Office
Concise Companion to Contemporary British and Irish Drama
Nadine Holdsworth, Mary Luckhurst
ebook 9780470766125, 9781405130530
Auithor's note: Significance
This chapter, the opening chapter of Blackwell's Concise Companion to British and Irish Drama, represents the first sustained publication to consider how the development of the 'New Europe' from 1989 until the uneasy conclusion of the Balkan Conflict in the late 1990s, was reflected in the output of British playwrights. The chapter offers the chance to view a selection of the most significant works in this period and to consider them as a coherent collective, although each play approaches its thematic and subject matter in a very different ways. This chapter therefore, offers a cultural reference point for British culture, European culture and as well as European history.
Rigour
The chapter employs the methodology of close textual analysis within the theoretical framework of historicism. In addition much use is made of a rigorous historical and political contextualisation in order to facilitate the work's analytical and interpretive framework.
As mentioned above, this work is the first to engage in this level of collective analysis of the works under consideration. It also contains original interview material.
Details of the book can be found at http://bookshop.blackwell.co.uk/jsp/display_product_info.jsp?isbn=9781405130530
http://bookshop.blackwell.co.uk/jsp/display_product_info.jsp?isbn=9781405130530
Willcocks, G. (2007). Europe in Flux: Exploring Revolution and Migration in British Plays of the 1990s. In N. Holdsworth, & M. Luckhurst (Eds.), Concise Companion to Contemporary British and Irish Drama Blackwell. http://bookshop.blackwell.co.uk/jsp/display_product_info.jsp?isbn=9781405130530
Europe in Flux: Exploring Revolution and Migration in British Plays of the 1990s. / Willcocks, Geoff.
Concise Companion to Contemporary British and Irish Drama. ed. / Nadine Holdsworth; Mary Luckhurst. Oxford : Blackwell, 2007.
Willcocks, G 2007, Europe in Flux: Exploring Revolution and Migration in British Plays of the 1990s. in N Holdsworth & M Luckhurst (eds), Concise Companion to Contemporary British and Irish Drama. Blackwell, Oxford. <http://bookshop.blackwell.co.uk/jsp/display_product_info.jsp?isbn=9781405130530>
Willcocks G. Europe in Flux: Exploring Revolution and Migration in British Plays of the 1990s. In Holdsworth N, Luckhurst M, editors, Concise Companion to Contemporary British and Irish Drama. Oxford: Blackwell. 2007
Willcocks, Geoff. / Europe in Flux: Exploring Revolution and Migration in British Plays of the 1990s. Concise Companion to Contemporary British and Irish Drama. editor / Nadine Holdsworth ; Mary Luckhurst. Oxford : Blackwell, 2007.
@inbook{1416b7485af34f7cb023e541279397fd,
title = "Europe in Flux: Exploring Revolution and Migration in British Plays of the 1990s",
author = "Geoff Willcocks",
note = "Auithor's note: Significance This chapter, the opening chapter of Blackwell{\textquoteright}s Concise Companion to British and Irish Drama, represents the first sustained publication to consider how the development of the {\textquoteleft}New Europe{\textquoteright} from 1989 until the uneasy conclusion of the Balkan Conflict in the late 1990s, was reflected in the output of British playwrights. The chapter offers the chance to view a selection of the most significant works in this period and to consider them as a coherent collective, although each play approaches its thematic and subject matter in a very different ways. This chapter therefore, offers a cultural reference point for British culture, European culture and as well as European history. Rigour The chapter employs the methodology of close textual analysis within the theoretical framework of historicism. In addition much use is made of a rigorous historical and political contextualisation in order to facilitate the work{\textquoteright}s analytical and interpretive framework. Originality As mentioned above, this work is the first to engage in this level of collective analysis of the works under consideration. It also contains original interview material. Details of the book can be found at http://bookshop.blackwell.co.uk/jsp/display_product_info.jsp?isbn=9781405130530",
isbn = "ebook 9780470766125",
editor = "Nadine Holdsworth and Mary Luckhurst",
booktitle = "Concise Companion to Contemporary British and Irish Drama",
publisher = "Blackwell",
T1 - Europe in Flux: Exploring Revolution and Migration in British Plays of the 1990s
AU - Willcocks, Geoff
N1 - Auithor's note: Significance This chapter, the opening chapter of Blackwell's Concise Companion to British and Irish Drama, represents the first sustained publication to consider how the development of the 'New Europe' from 1989 until the uneasy conclusion of the Balkan Conflict in the late 1990s, was reflected in the output of British playwrights. The chapter offers the chance to view a selection of the most significant works in this period and to consider them as a coherent collective, although each play approaches its thematic and subject matter in a very different ways. This chapter therefore, offers a cultural reference point for British culture, European culture and as well as European history. Rigour The chapter employs the methodology of close textual analysis within the theoretical framework of historicism. In addition much use is made of a rigorous historical and political contextualisation in order to facilitate the work's analytical and interpretive framework. Originality As mentioned above, this work is the first to engage in this level of collective analysis of the works under consideration. It also contains original interview material. Details of the book can be found at http://bookshop.blackwell.co.uk/jsp/display_product_info.jsp?isbn=9781405130530
SN - ebook 9780470766125
BT - Concise Companion to Contemporary British and Irish Drama
A2 - Holdsworth, Nadine
A2 - Luckhurst, Mary
PB - Blackwell


Manufacturers of all types have a responsibility to make certain that their products are safe for their intended use. When product-makers fail to meet this basic responsibility, the results can be disastrous.
At Gibbs & Fuerst, LLP, we know that when tools, equipment and heavy machinery at a construction site don't function like they're supposed to, workers are the ones who pay the most serious price. Our attorneys have extensive experience with construction accidents involving defective equipment and are available to serve clients in Riverside, San Bernardino and San Diego counties.
Construction work is dangerous enough without the risk of accident due to equipment failures or unsafely designed or manufactured products. We use a combination of experience, expert resources and determination to hold negligent manufacturers accountable for construction equipment failures and the devastating harm they can cause.
Anyone who claims that they were injured by a defective product has the burden of showing that the product had a design or manufacturing defect when it left the manufacturers control, or that the instructions or warnings provided by the manufacturer were inadequate to prevent injury. It is very difficult to meet that burden of proof if the product is not preserved in its post-accident condition as soon as possible. Our lawyers can help you with this and more.
We work with your workers' compensation lawyer to see that both claims are handled at the same time. We can also provide referrals to workers' compensation lawyers whom we've worked with in your area.
Call our Murrieta office at 951-813-2614, or our San Diego office at 619-618-2979 for a free consultation. You can also contact us online at any time and a lawyer from our office will call or respond to your e-mail soon.
We handle lawsuits involving construction equipment failures on a contingency basis; you pay no legal fees unless we obtain a verdict or settlement on your behalf.


text:
<?php
//----------------------------------------------------------------------
// Copyright (c) 2015 Raytheon BBN Technologies
//
// Permission is hereby granted, free of charge, to any person obtaining
// a copy of this software and/or hardware specification (the "Work") to
// deal in the Work without restriction, including without limitation the
// rights to use, copy, modify, merge, publish, distribute, sublicense,
// and/or sell copies of the Work, and to permit persons to whom the Work
// is furnished to do so, subject to the following conditions:
//
// The above copyright notice and this permission notice shall be
// included in all copies or substantial portions of the Work.
//
// THE WORK IS PROVIDED "AS IS", WITHOUT WARRANTY OF ANY KIND, EXPRESS
// OR IMPLIED, INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO THE WARRANTIES OF
// MERCHANTABILITY, FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE AND
// NONINFRINGEMENT. IN NO EVENT SHALL THE AUTHORS OR COPYRIGHT
// HOLDERS BE LIABLE FOR ANY CLAIM, DAMAGES OR OTHER LIABILITY,
// WHETHER IN AN ACTION OF CONTRACT, TORT OR OTHERWISE, ARISING FROM,
// OUT OF OR IN CONNECTION WITH THE WORK OR THE USE OR OTHER DEALINGS
// IN THE WORK.
//----------------------------------------------------------------------

require_once("user.php");
require_once("db_utils.php");
require_once("ma_constants.php");
require_once("ma_client.php");
require_once("util.php");
include_once('/etc/geni-ch/settings.php');

$user = geni_loadUser();
if (!isset($user) || is_null($user) || ! $user->isActive()) {
  exit();
}

// This admin functionality is for OPERATORS only
if (!$user->isAllowed(CS_ACTION::ADMINISTER_MEMBERS, CS_CONTEXT_TYPE::MEMBER, null)) {
  exit();
}

// Handle the HTTP request to figure out which LEAD request we're dealing with
if (array_key_exists('request_id', $_REQUEST) && array_key_exists('new_status', $_REQUEST) && array_key_exists('user_uid', $_REQUEST)) {
  $request_id = $_REQUEST['request_id'];
  $new_status = $_REQUEST['new_status'];
  $user_uid = $_REQUEST['user_uid'];
  if (array_key_exists('reason', $_REQUEST)) {
    $reason = $_REQUEST['reason'];
  } else {
    $reason = "No reason";
  }
  $approver = $user->prettyName();
  handle_lead_request($request_id, $new_status, $approver, $user_uid, $reason, $user);
} else {
  if (array_key_exists('request_id', $_REQUEST) && array_key_exists('notes', $_REQUEST)) {
    add_request_note($_REQUEST['request_id'], $_REQUEST['notes']);
  } else {
    print "Failed to handle request due to incomplete information.";
  }
}

// Update the lead_request db row identified by $request_id with $new_note
function add_request_note($request_id, $new_note)
{
  $conn = portal_conn();
  $sql = "UPDATE lead_request set "
  . "notes = "   . $conn->quote($new_note, 'text')
  . "where id = "  . $conn->quote($request_id, 'text');
  $db_response = db_execute_statement($sql, "update lead request note for request id#: " . $request_id);
  $db_error = $db_response[RESPONSE_ARGUMENT::OUTPUT];
  if($db_error == ""){
    print "Response successfully stored";
  } else {
    print "DB error: " . $db_error;
    error_log("DB error when adding note to lead request table: " . $db_error);
  }
}

// Update the lead_request db row identified by $request_id with $new_status,
// $approver, $user_uid, and $reason
function handle_lead_request($request_id, $new_status, $approver, $user_uid, $reason, $signer)
{
  $ma_url = get_first_service_of_type(SR_SERVICE_TYPE::MEMBER_AUTHORITY);
  $conn = portal_conn();
  if ($new_status == "approved") {
    $response = add_member_privilege($ma_url, $signer, $user_uid, "PROJECT_LEAD");
    if (!$response) {
      error_log("User $user_uid already a project lead, cannot be made a project lead");
    } else {
      send_approved_mail(geni_load_user_by_member_id($user_uid), $reason, $approver);
    }
  }
  $sql = "UPDATE lead_request set "
  . "status = "   . $conn->quote($new_status, 'text')  .  ", "
  . "reason = "   . $conn->quote($reason, 'text')  .  ", "
  . "approver = " . $conn->quote($approver, 'text')
  . "where id = " . $conn->quote($request_id, 'text');
  $db_response = db_execute_statement($sql, "Update lead request id#:" . $request_id);
  $db_error = $db_response[RESPONSE_ARGUMENT::OUTPUT];
  if($db_error == ""){
    print "Response successfully stored";
  } else {
    print "DB error: " . $db_error;
    error_log("DB error when updating lead request table: " . $db_error);
  }
}

// Send email to admins about the fact that $new_lead was approved because of $reason
function send_approved_mail($new_lead, $reason, $approver)
{
  global $portal_admin_email;
  $pretty_name = $new_lead->prettyName();
  $body = "$pretty_name approved to be project lead by $approver. \r\n";
  $body .= "Approved because: " . $reason . "\r\n";
  $body .= "Their username: " . $new_lead->username . "\r\n";
  $body .= "Their email: " . $new_lead->email() . "\r\n";
  $body .= "Their reason: " . $new_lead->reason() . "\r\n";
  $body .= "Their link: " . $new_lead->url() . "\r\n";
  $headers = "Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8\r\n";
  $headers .= "Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit\r\n";
  $to = $portal_admin_email;
  $subject = "Approved project lead request";
  mail($to, $subject, $body, $headers);
}

?>

redpajama_set_name: RedPajamaGithub


text:
Farmer Yoon
Pandaren (Humanoid)
Alliance Horde
Sunsong Ranch, Valley of the Four Winds
Relative(s)
Old Yoon (grandfather)
Farmer Yoon is a young pandaren from the city who inherited Sunsong Ranch from his grandfather. After giving his farm away, he is occasionally found at the Halfhill Market.
1.1 Mists of Pandaria
1.2 The Untamed Valley
This section concerns content related to Mists of Pandaria.
Although he grew up in Dawn's Blossom, in his youth he did have the opportunity to occasionally visit his grandfather, Old Yoon, at the family farm and learn all sorts of advice about farming, enough to get him started at least. His grandpa affectionately called him "Yoonie".
When Haohan Mudclaw, head of the Tiller's Union, heard Yoon had come to town and was planning to work the farm, Haohan offered to buy the land so that Yoon would just go back to the city 'where he belonged'. Yoon refused, stating that he can't just sell his family's farm. After much hard work, with the aid of an adventurer, Yoon finally gains the respect of Haohan and the other members of the Tillers council and is allowed to join the Tillers, with the adventurer alongside him as his business partner.
Soon after joining the Tiller's Union, Nana Mudclaw, the eldest member of the council and childhood friend of Old Yoon, decides to retire from her duties and chooses Farmer Yoon as her successor. Although he would have a good deal to learn, she considers him to have a good head on his shoulders and most importantly, a generous heart. Yoon decides to accept the responsibility but doesn't believe that he will be able to work his farm and be on the council at the same time. Rather than sell the family property to some stranger, he gifts it to his business partner, entrusting them to take care of it as he himself would.
Yoon can be seen at the Celestial Court on the Timeless Isle.
The Untamed Valley
This section concerns content related to the Warcraft novels, novellas, or short stories.
During the events of The Untamed Valley, Farmer Yoon was not present as he was planning a food-delivery contract with dwarven masons within the Jade Forest on behalf of the Tillers' Union.[1]
Yoon is involved in most of the Tillers' quests, see the Tillers quest section for more information.
<Farmer Yoon wipes his brow wearily.>
This is hopeless! I'll never move these rocks!
I never imagined farming would involve so many... exotic odors.
"I reckon there just ain't enough hours in the day!"
How did that sound? Too forced? You think it would fly at the market?
Are your thumbs turning green yet?
Mine look pretty much the same.
I never thought about where the food on my table came from before we started this farming business.
This experience has been enlightening, to say the least!
Look at the sky, <name>! It's raining! Should be good for the crops, eh?
Wow, just look at this storm! Well, crops like water, right?
Exalted with the Tillers
Hey there, <name>!
How's it feel to be a full-fledged farmer?
^ The Untamed Valley
Retrieved from "https://wow.gamepedia.com/index.php?title=Farmer_Yoon&oldid=5573946"
Valley of the Four Winds NPCs
Timeless Isle NPCs
Destination: Pandaria characters


Black Framed Wall Art Architecture Pretentious Idea has many pictures and they will inspire you about architecture. We also provide many ideas for you in here, just browse our architecture collection by using search feature that located on top of this Black Framed Wall Art Architecture Pretentious Idea post or go to related post section that we choose for you.
Black Framed Wall Art Architecture Pretentious Idea also has 14 more images including vibrant black framed wall art architecture, stylish ideas black framed wall art architecture, luxury ideas black framed wall art architecture, trendy ideas black framed wall art architecture, clever ideas black framed wall art architecture, cool design ideas black framed wall art architecture, astounding design black framed wall art architecture, ingenious ideas black framed wall art architecture, classy inspiration black framed wall art architecture, innovational ideas black framed wall art architecture, pleasurable inspiration black framed wall art architecture, surprising idea black framed wall art architecture, homely ideas black framed wall art architecture, and super idea black framed wall art architecture.
Black Framed Wall Art Architecture Pretentious Idea also has 5 more images left and there are crafty black framed wall art architecture, pretentious inspiration black framed wall art architecture, phenomenal black framed wall art architecture, pretentious design black framed wall art architecture, and awesome inspiration ideas black framed wall art architecture.


text:
Q: How to pass result from an array to another method without 0 numbers in java? Can you please advise how can I pass results from an array to another array without some numbers? In this case without zero numbers. Here is my code, I'm stuck.
Result is: [0, 1, 2, 3, 0, 5, 0, 7, 0, 0, 0, 11] - all I want to do, is to create another array and pass there numbers from above without 0's.
Thanks.
public class SieveOfEratosthenes {
    public static void main(String[] args) {
        int[] myArray = new int[12];

        fillArrayWithNumbers(myArray);

        System.out.println(Arrays.toString(sieve(myArray)));

    }

    private static void fillArrayWithNumbers(int[] myArray) {
        for (int i = 0; i < myArray.length; i++) {
            myArray[i] = i;
        }
    }

    public static int[] sieve(int[] maximumNumber) {
        for (int j = 2; j < maximumNumber.length; j++) {
            for (int i = j * 2; i < maximumNumber.length; i += j) {
                maximumNumber[i] = 0;
                }
        }
        return maximumNumber;
    }
}

A: You can convert your Int[] to a Stream and filter out the zero values.
Code
public static void main(String[] args) {
    int[] arr = new int[]{0, 1, 2, 3, 0, 5, 0, 7, 0, 0, 0, 11};

    int[] ints = Arrays.stream(arr)
            .filter(i -> i != 0)
            .toArray();

    Arrays.stream(ints).forEach(System.out::println);

}

Output
1
2
3
5
7
11

A: The solution is above as what infinitezero said to write a for loop that has you array length. Then copy items in the array as length.
for(int i = 0; i < arr.length; i++){
  if(arr[i] == 0){

  }
  else{
    arr[i] = arr2[i];
  }

A: I think you can create a new array and fill it with above zero value:
What you want to do it to omit all even numbers (except 2). Then it should be done like this:
public static int[] sieve(int[] maximumNumber) {
    int[] result = new int[maximumNumber.length];
    int index= 0;

    for (int i = 1; i < maximumNumber.length; i++) {
        if (i == 2 || i % 2 != 0) { // i is 2 or odd
           result[index] = i;
           index++; // This will store the real length of the array
        }
    }
    return Arrays.copyOfRange(result, 0, index);
}


text:
Gerhard Wilfried Wiedemann (* 1949 in Stolzenau) ist ein deutscher Jurist.

Leben
Wiedemann studierte von 1968 bis 1973 Rechtswissenschaft an der Universität Hamburg. Nach Absolvieren der juristischen Staatsprüfungen in Hamburg war er von 1977 bis 1980 als Assistent am Institut für Wirtschafts- und Gesellschaftsrecht der Universität Heidelberg tätig. Dort wurde er 1980 zum Dr. iur. promoviert.

1981 erfolgte seine Zulassung als Rechtsanwalt in Düsseldorf. 1984 wurde er Partner in der Rechtsanwaltskanzlei Bruckhaus pp, seit 2000 Freshfields Bruckhaus Deringer.

Ab 1994 lehrte Wiedemann als Lehrbeauftragter für Wettbewerbs- und Kartellrecht an der Universität Rostock. Seit 2002 ist er dort Honorarprofessor für Deutsches und Europäisches Kartellrecht.

Schriften (Auswahl)
 Gemeinschaftsunternehmen im deutschen Kartellrecht. Heidelberg 1981, ISBN 3-8005-6970-1.
 Kommentar zu den Gruppenfreistellungsverordnungen des EWG-Kartellrechts. Band 1. O. Schmidt, Köln 1989, ISBN 3-504-41193-7.
 Kommentar zu den Gruppenfreistellungsverordnungen des EWG-Kartellrechts. Band 2. O. Schmidt, Köln 1990, ISBN 3-504-41194-5.
 Hg.: Handbuch des Kartellrechts. München 2020, ISBN 3-406-71676-8.

Literatur
 Tobias Klose, Martin Klusmann und Stefan Thomas (Hrsg.): Das Unternehmen in der Wettbewerbsordnung. Festschrift für Gerhard Wiedemann zum 70. Geburtstag. München 2020, ISBN 3-406-75515-1.

Weblinks

 freshfields.com

Einzelnachweise

Rechtswissenschaftler (20. Jahrhundert)
Rechtswissenschaftler (21. Jahrhundert)
Hochschullehrer (Universität Rostock)
Deutscher
Geboren 1949
Mann

redpajama_set_name: RedPajamaWikipedia


text:
2023 Window Restoration Campaign
Steeped in the rich history of Selinsgrove and Snyder County, All Saints Episcopal Church has sat upon the corner of East Snyder and North Market Streets since the foundation was prepared in 1899.
Mary Kittera Snyder, our church's foundress, was the great-niece of Major Anthony Selin for whom Selinsgrove was named, and granddaughter of Pennsylvania's third Governor, Simon Snyder. After many years of turmoil and determination, Mary was able to set to work on a long-standing dream and began her work on All Saints.
The stained glass windows are a most notable feature and are rich in symbolism. Above the High Altar is a Gothic arch containing the symbols "ALPHA" and "OMEGA," reminiscent of our Lord's own words, "I am the Alpha and Omega, the first and last, the beginning and the end." Also depicted is the cross surmounted by the crown and palm branches, summarizing the records of saintly victory.
High Altar at Christmastime
The West end of the church at Christmastime
The great rose window at the west end of the church contains four large lozenges, or circular panels, with a dominant flower motif. These floral panes can be taken to symbolize Our Lady and they serve to remind us that, as we go forth into the world, it is our vocation to touch all things that they may blossom and flower to the glory of God.
The windows in the narthex, nave, and chancel contain no definite figures; their symbolism is in their colors. The deep turquoise and amethyst hues at the edges gradually blend into brighter shades of gold reminding us that the night is past and that God has brought us out of darkness into the light of the all-embracing love of His dear Son.
Windows in the narthex, nave, and chancel
On 3 November 2024, All Saints will be celebrating 125 years of being a part of the history of our beloved borough. To celebrate the 125th Anniversary we will be hosting a reception and presentation as well an open house and tours of the church.
The planning committee, consisting of Dena Gentner, Kathy Boushie, Janice Jones, Roberta Garlock, Terry Stahley, and Charles Knapp, is working on the restoration project and fundraising campaign to begin in February.
Since many people within the community are drawn to the historical significance of All Saints Episcopal Church, anyone is invited to sponsor a window or contribute to the 125th Window Restoration Fund. All donations are gratefully accepted and may be dedicated "In Memory of", "In Honor of", or "In Thanksgiving for."
All gifts will be recorded in the Gifts & Memorials Parish Record.
Donations may be sent to:
All Saints Episcopal Church
Selinsgrove, PA 17870
For more information call:
allsaints@ptd.net
The Reverend Canon Paul C. Donecker
129 N. Market Street


An implementation for association analysis with CNV data.
An implementation for association analysis with CNV data in R. It provides two methods for association study: first, the observed probe intensity measurement can be directly used to detect the association of CNV with phenotypes of interest. Second, the most probable copy number is estimated with the proposed likelihood and the association of the most probable copy number with phenotype is tested. This method can be applied to both the independent and correlated population.


text:
N.B. This was written in July, 2009 and has not been updated.
Nothing to Share: There's Little Value in the RSA
Introduction and Executive Summary
Last summer, an article in the Rutland Herald[1] suggested that revenue sharing from an agreement made during the sale of Vermont Yankee to Entergy[2] could amount to up to $1.2 billion for Vermont ratepayers. As it turns out, that figure was exaggerated by a relatively minor error,[3] but some of the evidence in the Public Service Board Docket 7440 purports to value the clause at up to $1 billion. In fact, Entergy has repeatedly asserted that this clause alone justifies relicensing the plant.[4] Indeed, at this time, the great value it assigns to the RSA is at the very core of Entergy's case for relicensing. Given all of the testimony presented to the PSB, the value of the revenues shared by the RSA is actually far more likely to be zero, or very close to zero.
Most of the assumptions required for the RSA to produce any greater value are improbable taken one-by-one. The probability of all of the assumptions occurring simultaneously is virtually nil. Specifically, four conditions must all occur at the same time to lend the RSA any real value:
1) The electricity price market must rise substantially from current levels and remain there from 2012 to 2023.
2) Vermont Yankee must sell all of its power at (or above) these market prices. In particular, there can be no reduction from market prices for Vermont consumers.
3) At the same time, inflation must remain approximately 25% below the historically low levels of the decade from 1997-2007.
4) Vermont Yankee must operate at capacity factor levels which have no precedent either in its own long-term history, or elsewhere nationally.
The analyses presented to the Board simply assume all of these conditions; in most instances, tacitly. There is virtually no argumentation presented for any of them. Yet all but the first seem implausible on their face, and the concatenation of all of them seems virtually unimaginable.
Clearly then, the RSA does not provide an adequate justification for relicensing Vermont Yankee: not as a sole condition, as suggested by Entergy, nor even as a significant part of a larger set of conditions.
While the RSA does have value as an insurance policy against the improbable events just enumerated occurring simultaneously,[5] this value can be replicated in different ways without any of the risks associated with running a nuclear power plant and with indefinitely storing its radioactive waste. But if the "premium" for this insurance is relicensing VY, the policy costs way too much. Better policies are available at lower costs.
The purpose of this report is to scrutinize the evidence presented in Docket 7440, carefully interrogating the data already presented, and, in particular, delving into the explicit and tacit assumptions made by the analysts. A close examination reveals that many key premises are unjustified and improbable, and that therefore, the conclusions reached are either tenuous at best or, at worst, plain wrong. In other words, our conclusions are based on looking more analytically at the existing evidence than the experts[6] who presented it, rather than on offering any new facts or data.
A More Detailed Review of the Evidence
Consider, first, the precise definition of what is to be shared, according to the MOU: ""Excess Revenue" equals the excess of VYNPS's revenues determined by taking VYNPS's average energy price (dollars per MWh) during the fiscal year less the "Strike Price" (dollars per MWh). If the average energy price is greater than the "Strike Price," that difference (in $/MWh) times the total MWh sold from VYNPS by ENVY during the fiscal year commencing on March 13 shall be the "Excess Revenues." … VYNPS revenues are based on actual price for energy and capacity sold by VYNPS during such fiscal year whether to VYNPC, its sponsors, other PPA purchasers or to market."
Imagine two lines. One is energy prices over time. The other is the "strike price," which rises with inflation.[7] Until the energy price for a given year exceeds the strike price, there is nothing to share. In other words, if there's no gap between those 2 lines, there's no revenue sharing. The energy price line sets the first 2 conditions required to obtain value from the RSA.
1) The Market Price for Electricity
Wholesale electric power in New England has dropped to as low as the $30-35 per MW range because demand fell both regionally and nationally, thanks largely to the economic depression. Since the strike price in 2012 beginning is $61, in order for the RSA to take effect, energy prices would need to more than double between 2009 and 2012 for there to be any "excess" revenues to share. The only plausible way that can happen is if the primary reason prices declined is reversed: namely, if the economy recovers. While it is quite reasonable to assume such a recovery, it is an assumption, not a certainty. Even in a recovery, electricity prices between 2012 and 2022 are now expected to be roughly 1/3 lower than what was previously forecast,[8] given changed conditions.[9]
Higher market rates for electricity are necessary for the RSA to take effect, but they are not sufficient. There are 3 more hurdles.
2) All VY power must be sold at or above Market Prices
In order for the value of the RSA to reach the figures projected by the analysts,[10] Vermont Yankee must receive full market rates for all of its output, including any power sold to Vermont utilities. However, to the extent that any substantial amount is sold below the anticipated market price, the value of the RSA will be concomitantly reduced. There is thus a direct correlation between the value of the profit share and the price at which VY energy is sold to Vermonters: the lower the price to Vermonters, the lower the value of the RSA. Similarly, the higher the value of the RSA, the higher the price Vermonters will pay for VY power. There is no free lunch.
Still, the expert analyses all simply assume that all of Vermont Yankee's output is sold at market rates, probably because, as of today, there are no power agreements for the relicensing period. Nevertheless, this is certain to be a political non-starter,[11] and it is likely to prove a regulatory hurdle as well. It is virtually certain that the legislature will not vote for relicensing in the absence of power contracts advantageous to Vermont consumers. It is unlikely that the PSB will grant a Certificate of Public Good under these circumstances either.[12]
In sum, if Vermont Yankee is to be relicensed at all, it is unlikely to be selling power to Vermont ratepayers at full market rates. To the extent it does not do so, the revenues forecasted by the analysts will be exaggeratedly high. Thus, this analytical assumption is exceedingly unlikely to prove correct. Yet it forms the unspoken basis for all of the numbers thrown about in the PSB case and in public so far.
3) Economic Recovery and Price Inflation
Another basic assumption is that an economic recovery powerful enough to get electric prices to double will, at the same time, permit inflation rates to fall from historic levels. Yet, if the historic rate were merely to hold steady, then even with doubled energy prices, the RSA would be worth either substantially less or nothing at all, because the strike price line would move with the energy price line and there would be no gap between them: no excess, and therefore no sharing.
Indeed, this postulate of sharp economic recovery and falling inflation is quite unusual. Inflation and economic growth have been highly correlated in the US economy, such that, generally speaking, greater economic growth produces higher rates of inflation and vice versa.
Moreover, this is especially problematic right now, because most economists, including the Chairman of the Federal Reserve Bank, believe that the very policies which have been implemented to allow the economy (and therefore electricity prices) to recover will, if not carefully monitored and adjusted, also produce substantial inflation, presumably higher than the historically rather low levels of the last decade.
It is therefore odd to say the least that not one of the experts in the Public Service Board case explains why it is plausible simply to assume both a full and robust economic recovery and, simultaneously, assume lower rates of inflation than during the decade from 1997-2007.[13]
Specifically, the strike price escalator is set by a formula including general inflation, wage inflation, and uranium prices (see Footnote #7). The numbers produced by the experts all assume that this escalator will grow by no more than 2-3%. Yet, in the years 1998-2008, however, the strike price escalated at 4.1%,[14] a rate already lower than during many years in the past 3 decades.
In sum, while it is possible that this combination of high growth and low inflation may occur, there is simply no basis for assuming it. Indeed, there is every reason to doubt such a presupposition. Yet, without it, the forecaster's estimates of RSA would again decline, perhaps to zero.
4) Vermont Yankee must run perfectly
In addition to everything already noted, virtually all of the testimony also assumes that Vermont Yankee will generate power at a rate which exceeds both its own historic average, and the national historic average.[15] It must accomplish this during the full 10-year period of the RSA, despite the fact that it will have already reached the end of the life for which it was designed and built. Any decline in VY's capacity factor will result in less revenues generated and therefore less "excess" revenues to share.
According to Bruce Wiggett's testimony, Vermont Yankee has operated at close to 100% output during the non-outage years and 87.88% during the outage years during the last decade. He then reduces the 100% to 98% for the non-outage years in his projections.[16] DPS assumptions are very similar. This translates to an overall capacity factor of 91.25%.
Nationwide, however, according to the website of the Nuclear Energy Institute {"NEI"), an industry group, the only year since 1971 to achieve this high a rate was 2007, and that figure is provisional. The years since 2000 have been in the range of 88-91%, 1999 was a bit over 85% and all previous years well under 80%. As of 2003, Vermont Yankee's lifetime average was around 80% according to DPS. My best guess is that VY's lifetime average capacity factor to date may now be on the order of 85%.
It is worth noting that, when it comes to putting one's money where one's mouth is, neither CVPS nor their insurer JP Morgan are betting on this rosy scenario. CVPS maintains forced outage insurance — basically insurance against a lowered capacity factor — for which they paid $1.3 million for the 2007 calendar year. The policy has a $1 million deductible and a $10 million maximum limit.[17] Insurance cost is based on risk: if the probability of a forced outage were truly close to zero, one would assume that the price of such insurance should be much lower. If it were zero, presumably no insurance would have been needed or purchased.
In addition, the PSB testimony already shows that Entergy plans to replace the plant's condenser during the 10-year period covered by the MOU, which will necessitate at least 2 longer outages than usual.[18] Other components – especially the transformer[19] — may well also need replacing, according to the testimony.
Thus, while it is possible that Vermont Yankee will come close to achieving the unprecedented capacity factors assumed by the analysts, it certainly is not probable.
Combining the factors just discussed
In sum: if electricity prices don't at least double from 2009 prices, the RSA will be worthless. If Vermonters are not paying these higher rates for any VY power they purchase (approximately 50% higher than current rates paid for VY power), the RSA will be worth less than anticipated by the experts. If electricity rates do rise, but general inflation continues at historic rates or higher, the RSA will be worth either less or nothing. Finally, if Vermont Yankee does not operate at historically unprecedented capacity factors, the RSA will be worth considerably less than all of the expert testimony calculates.
It is possible that all of these improbable scenarios will occur simultaneously. On the other hand, there is simply no good reason to assume that they will. The purpose of the analyses presented to the PSB is to provide a well-founded basis for projecting future economic impacts. That basis, in turn, will become one of the premises for decisions about whether or not to relicense Vermont Yankee. These dramatically unconservative assumptions provide an extremely unstable foundation for decision-making.
It would be unwise to use even one unreasonable or improbable assumption as the premise for such an analysis. But in this case, the majority of analysts have strung four of them together, each additional improbability reducing still further the probability of the whole concatenation. At some point, the exercise gets to be a version of the old Israeli joke "If grandmother had wheels, she'd be a bus."
But alas, the problems do not end here.
Problems, Problems
Four witnesses presented full analyses to the Board: Bruce Wiggett (for Entergy), Jacob Thomas and George Nagle (for DPS) and Paul Chernick (for the Conservation Law Foundation and VPIRG). Douglas Smith also performed an analysis, but because he maintained that GMP's revenue figures are proprietary, we have no way of examining his methods or his computations.[20]
Wiggett's and Thomas's figures are much higher than those of Nagle and Chernick, because they are based on revenue projections made before the economic collapse. We are thus left with George Nagle's calculations with updated revenue forecasts, as corrected and further updated by Paul Chernick.[21]
These Nagle-Chernick calculations (if we may call them that) show that, if electricity rates rise, if Vermonters pay higher rates for VY power, if Vermont Yankee continues to achieve exceedingly high capacity factors over a full decade, and if inflation declines by 25% from recent levels, then there is some, albeit small, value to VYNPC for the RSA. Specifically, Vermont Yankee Nuclear Power Corporation's share of the RSA would be a bit less than $165 million in nominal dollars over a ten year period.
The question then becomes: who gets this money from VYNPC? Unfortunately, the answer is not at all straightforward.
CVPS's July 31, 2002 press release announcing the sale to Entergy reported: "Vermont Yankee Nuclear Power Corporation is owned by Central Vermont Public Service Corp. (35%); Green Mountain Power Corp. (19%); New England Power Company (22.5%); Connecticut Light and Power Co. (9.5%); Central Maine Power Co. (4.0%); Public Service Company of New Hampshire (4.0%); Cambridge Electric Light Co. (2.5%) and Western Massachusetts Electric Co. (2.5%)." Approximately 1 year later, the VT Supreme Court still referred to CVPS and GMP as 55% owners.
Currently, however, CVPS and GMP own 92.5% of VYNPC, with Central Maine Power owning the other 7.5%. Despite informal questioning and pre-filed and verbal testimony in PSB Docket 7440, how this ownership change took place and what its implications are for the RSA remains a mystery.[22] This much is clear, however: ownership of VYNPC has changed.
In her February 11, 2009 pre-filed testimony, Mary Powell from GMP testified that: "Although GMP believes that Vermont is entitled to 92.5% of the revenue sharing benefits, I also understand that the issue of Vermont's entitlement may be disputed in the future." (p.5) Under questioning at the Board on June 2, 2009, CVPS's William Deehan noted that the now-former owners of VYNPC have told CVPS employees that they expect to receive a share of RSA revenues,[23] virtually assuring such a dispute. At best, considerable uncertainty persists, such that virtually all of the testimony before the Public Service Board models both a 55% share and a 92.5% share.[24]
Ultimately, this question will almost certainly be sorted out by lawyers,[25] either through negotiation or through the courts. This assures that even if Vermont utilities do receive the higher share at the end of the day, there will be significant offsetting legal costs involved to obtain it. (None of the testimony makes any allowance for this obvious eventuality). It is also worth noting that, since this needs to be settled by either negotiation or litigation, there will be an overhang of uncertainty until it is resolved, which could last for years.
Dollars and No Sense
In other words, by stringing together an exceedingly improbable concatenation of assumptions about the future, there could be as much as $165 million dollars of VYNPC's portion of "excess revenues" to be shared over the ten-year period of the MOU. This would imply savings for Vermonters of around $90-150 million, depending on whether the allocation is ultimately fixed at 55% or at 92.5%. It's quite clear that the higher figure would be subject to some reduction by legal (and possibly court) fees.
However, this scenario can take place only if either 1) Vermont ratepayers are also paying upwards of $3 billion for VY power over the 20-year relicensing period or if 2) Vermonters purchase none of VY's power, allowing all of it to be sold at the highest possible prices. The second assumption presumes that VY is allowed to operate strictly as a merchant generator, with Vermonters purchasing all of their power elsewhere. Clearly, this is a political non-starter. It is simply unimaginable that the legislature would allow VY to be relicensed based conditioned on Vermonters receiving none of its power. Since we can safely eliminate the second possibility, only the first remains.
In sum, under an implausible set of assumptions all geared to maximize its value, the RSA might reduce Vermonters' electric rates by as much as somewhat less than $150 million, but only in the context of paying $3 billion for power from VY. More plausible assumptions would reduce the maximum value still further. For example, if inflation produced the historical strike price escalation rate of 4.1%, then the estimates just given would decline to $46M (at the full, unrealizable 92.5% share) If inflation were to go to 4.6% — hardly a staggering or unprecedented rate, these figures would fall to zero. In similar fashion, sensitivity analyses for all questionable assumptions are likely to show similar reductions.
Since we believe that the value of the RSA will be vanishingly small or non-existent, we have put a number of other complex issues to one side. Nonetheless, in the interests of scanning the whole horizon, we will present some of them here briefly.
First, we have already quoted the MOU to the effect that, "VYNPS revenues are based on actual price for energy and capacity sold by VYNPS…." Nevertheless, Entergy apparently contests this, and is currently attempting to assert that capacity sales should not be included in calculating the shared "excess" revenue.[26] For the purposes of our discussion, we need only note that all of the figures discussed in the PSB case and elsewhere assume that capacity sales are included in these calculations. If they were to be excluded as Entergy suggests, the "excess" to be shared would be even lower that what is suggested above, reinforcing still further all of the conclusions previously drawn.
Second, since the RSA depends on the "actual price" received, there is an incentive for Entergy to "game" its sales.[27] To give the most obvious example, if Entergy were to sell VY power to one of its subsidiaries at well below market prices, total revenues could easily be reduced enough to guarantee that there would be no "excess." The power could then be resold by the subsidiary at full market prices (or conceivably, even higher). Should the plant be relicensed, the PSB will need to exercise considerable imagination and diligence to assure that this and other devices are not used. To the extent that the Board fails in this endeavor,[28] if energy prices are high, Entergy has every incentive to find ways to keep all of the revenue rather than sharing it with VYNPC.
Third, and similarly, under the MOU, "excess" revenues would be shared only on power sold during the 10-year period of the RSA, giving Entergy an incentive to make any necessary time-consuming modifications or repairs during the RSA period. Since revenues earned during this period would have to be shared with others, they would have less value than either before or after the RSA period, when they would not.
Fourth, at present it is not certain what would happen to the portion of "shared revenues" attributable to Vermont utilities. One way or another, all parties appear to assume that they would belong to the ratepayers. Whether that means ratepayers of utilities other than GMP and CVPS remains an open question, currently being negotiated by those utilities. Other proposals, including using the funds to underwrite efficiency programs, have also been floated in Docket 7440 testimony and briefs.
Finally, fifth, as noted repeatedly, all current estimates are based on Entergy receiving full market rates for electricity sold. As this is written, however, negotiations are continuing in search of Power Purchase Agreements between Vermont utilities and Entergy which would probably, if successful, result in less than market prices for a substantial portion of VY's output. This, in turn, would minimize any "excess revenues" available to be shared, thus reducing still further, and almost certainly to zero, the value of the RSA.
At best, any value which the RSA is alleged to produce is a "best guess," based perhaps on considerable knowledge, but reliable only to the extent that crystal balls are operating well. Over time, however, economic forecasts in general and electricity market forecasts in particular have proven to be consistently, even staggeringly, wrong.[29]
With that caveat firmly in mind, however, the conclusions in this case are pretty obvious. Energy prices and the strike price inflator are likely to move in tandem, virtually assuring that, from today's lowered platform for energy prices, there is no "spread" between the revenues VY earns and the so-called "Strike price." Vermont Yankee is not likely to receive a Certificate of Public Good or approval from the legislature unless the utilities can agree to power contracts which price VY power considerably below market prices, but such contracts would virtually guarantee that there would be no "excess" revenues to be shared. And Vermont Yankee is unlikely to operate virtually perfectly over the entire decade of the MOU, and therefore its output is extremely likely to be lower than the experts are assuming.
Each of these seems, in isolation, sufficient cause to cast considerable doubt to the value obtained by these analyses, since they are based on presupposing exactly the opposite. After all, just as in any logical argument, if any of the premises are wrong, the conclusions do not follow. The likelihood of all of these improbable assumptions proving correct – simultaneously – is vanishingly small. And finally, even if they did prove to be correct, the greatest plausible value which could result from the RSA is but an extremely tiny fraction of what Vermonters would pay out in energy prices.
We conclude from all this that:
The most probable case is that there will be no revenues to share, because the probability of all components required aligning simultaneously is vanishingly small. Increased electricity prices are likely to matched by increasing general inflation, labor rates, and uranium prices. Unprecedented capacity factors are unlikely to be maintained over the ten-year period, and VY is unlikely to be relicensed at all without significantly discounted power prices for Vermonters.
Should this inference prove false, however, it is possible that Vermont ratepayers will see a benefit of at most well under $150 million over a 10-year period in the context of paying over 20 times this amount for electricity over a 20-year period. And
This marginal benefit is far from assured. Substantial technical and legal hurdles could well make even this amount of revenue sharing disappear. Therefore, finally,
The only real assured value of the RSA at this time is as insurance against extreme market volatility.[30] Purchasing power from renewably generated sources at fixed rates, or owning renewable generating facilities, could provide similar price protection at considerably lower risk, financially, legally, and environmentally[31]. Offsetting demand with efficiency efforts would, in fact, guarantee this result at lowest cost to Vermonters. Since we have argued these points at length in another report, we will not repeat ourselves here.
[1] "Utilities may reap $750M from Yankee: Profit-sharing provision likely incentive for re-licensing" by Susan Smallheer, published July 6, 2008.
[2] When Vermont Yankee Nuclear Power Station was sold to Entergy in 2002, a Memorandum of Understanding ("MOU") was signed between the Vermont Yankee Nuclear Power Corporation ("VYNPC"), Entergy (Entergy Nuclear Operations and Entergy Nuclear Vermont Yankee "ENVY"), the Vermont Department of Public Service ("DPS"), Central Vermont Public Service ("CVPS") and Green Mountain Power ("GMP"). The MOU's profit sharing provision, section 4, which is also referred to as the "revenue sharing agreement ("RSA") or "revenue sharing clause ("RSC") specifies: "In the event that ENVY extends the operation of the VYNPS pursuant to extension of its NRC license, ENVY agrees to share with VYNPC fifty percent of the "Excess Revenue" for ten years commencing on March 13, 2012."
To avoid any possible confusion, I also want to note here that Vermont Yankee's current price contracts end with the termination of its existing license in March of 2012. Currently, there are no contracts for power purchases after that date. Conversely, the RSA begins only with the start of the new license, and then covers a ten-year period. It has no bearing at all on the current contract.
[3] A DPS analyst included a so-called "retail adder" when he should not have. This erroneously added 11% to the figures his spreadsheet generated.
[4] One example suffices here. On December 22, 2008, Jay Thayer wrote to the Board, explaining that while a negotiated contract had been promised for that day, no contracts had been signed and none were necessary. In particular, on the 2nd page of his letter, he asserts: "It should be evident that the value embedded in the Revenue Sharing Clause in and of itself provides sufficient economic justification for the Board to issue a CPG in Docket No. 7440."
[5] This notion of the RSA as insurance was introduced by a variety of witnesses who appeared before the PSB in May and June, such as William Deehan and Richard LaCapra.
[6] Indeed, I make no claim to expertise of any kind.
[7] More precisely, the MOU states: "The Strike Price will be adjusted based on three indices determined by the most recently published information as of the adjustment date: the Employment Cost Index ("ECI"), the Gross Domestic Product Implicit Price Deflator ("GDP-IPD") and the Nuclear Fuel Market Index ("NFMI"). The weighting of the indices is 60% for ECI, 25% for GDP-IPD and 15% for NFMI. The indices are determined as follows:
* Employment Cost Index (ECI) – Total compensation for private non-farm workers in the Northeast Region including NY; Source Bureau of Labor Statistics (Index June 1989 = 100).
* Gross Domestic Product Implicit Price Deflator (GDP-IPD) – US Government Statistic; BEA National Income and Product Accounts Tables (Index 1992 = 100).
* Nuclear Fuel Market Index (NFMI) – Using market from trade publications such as Trade Tech, Nukem and UX, the uranium market price, conversion, enrichment and fabrication costs will be updated monthly and indexed to February 2012 prices and calculated using weighted averages as set forth in Schedule 1 hereto."
[8] Before the national economic depression took hold, there was something like a consensus around the forecast based on a report called Avoided Energy Supply Costs in New England: 2007 FINAL REPORT: FINAL – August 10, 2007 ("AESC").
[9] Despite a dramatically different economy, Entergy's witness, Bruce Wiggett, is sticking to his guns. In his May 20, 2009 testimony to the PSB, he was asked: "Have you updated your calculations of the revenue sharing agreement value given current economic conditions? A. No, I have not." He goes on to add that, while "Certainly the short-term market has changed. But my testimony is for an extended period of time, and I feel that it's still reflective of the conditions that could be prevail [sic] over that extended period." (p.11) Never let facts get in the way of a good argument.
[10] The possible exception is Douglas Smith from Green Mountain Power. His testimony provides a low value and a high value for the RSA, and a discussion of scenarios, but he does not correlate the two, at least in part because his market forecasts are proprietary. It is therefore not clear exactly how he arrived at his figures, and accordingly, I have not made any effort to assess his projections.
[11] I will merely note that I have spoken to numerous legislators, not one of whom appeared to believe that the plant would be relicensed in the absence of contracts highly favorable to Vermont ratepayers.
[12] As of this writing, even some of the parties supporting relicensing believe that a CPG should not be granted in the absence of new contracts. Specifically, GMP (cf., e.g., July 17 brief, pp. 6-8), VEC, and DPS (July 17 brief, pp. 58-62) have all stated this explicitly. CVPS attempts to strike a middle position by arguing that PPAs are not "required" for a CPG, but that, at the same time, "ENVY likely has not satisfied its burden" without them. (p.12) What "likely" means is never really made clear in their brief, at least not to this reader.
[13] Though his point of attack is rather different from mine, William Deehan's June testimony challenges this notion as well. Indeed, the CVPS July 17, 2009 brief is even more pointed in finding #48, on page 20: "After 2012, the indices that control the strike-price should be expected to escalate faster than overall inflation because of its partial weighting on labor costs."
[14] The historical figure is from Bruce Wiggett's pre-filed testimony of March 3, 2008, pp 6-7. To be fair, Wiggett does take a stab at an explanation. Because he believes that the price of uranium will return to the averages of the 10 years preceding 1997, Wiggett's analysis assumes that the escalator will fall to about 2.8%. Frankly, this reasoning appears completely specious to us, particularly in the light of a new generation of nuclear reactors around the world which can only increase the demand for and therefore the price of both raw uranium and processed nuclear fuel. Moreover, Wiggett never addresses the broader disjunction between assuming this reduction in the escalator and simultaneously assuming market price increases.
[15] Douglas C. Smith presented testimony for GMP on Feb. 11, 2009 in which he raises this issue and provides a performance range. See pages 9-15. All other testimony appears to just assume unusually high capacity factors.
[16] Wiggett pre-filed March 3, 2008, p. 6.
[17] 2006 CVPS Annual Report, p. 38.
[18] Cf. Jay Thayer's May 21,2009 testimony, pages 23-24.
[19] See DPS July 17 brief p.12: "If the spare transformer proves to be unreliable, it could take approximately 18 months to obtain a replacement transformer.… Installation of the designated spare transformer would require VY to reduce its output by approximately 20%."
[20] Frankly, this is a shame because he appears to be the only analyst to have carefully considered the assumptions and tested scenarios by varying the key ones.
[21] Specifically, Chernick shows that Nagle used the wrong index to calculate the strike price; that he used peak energy rather than round-the-clock energy to calculate the price of VY's estimated sales (thus inflating the revenues on which the RSC would be based); that he incorrectly adjusts prices to the "Vermont Yankee node," (again inflating revenues) and finally that he overestimates the value of capacity in New England. Finally, both Chernick and Nagle filed testimony correcting a mathematical error on Nagle's original spreadsheet.
[22] For example, on p. 10, GMP's July 17, 2009 brief states: "Although there were eight VYNPC owners at the time of the sale of the VY Station by VYNPC to ENVY, Docket 6545 Order at 12-13, all but three owners sold their interests back to VYNPC in 2003." Finding #67 in CVPS's July 17 brief (p.25) concurs on the 2003 date. But the DPS brief of the same date says, on p.5: "Coincident with the sale from VYNPC to ENVY [which took place in 2002], ten of the original 13 owners liquidated their holdings in VYNPC, leaving CVPS, GMP and Central Maine Power Company as the remaining stockholders of VYNPC." It cites the order in Docket 6545 at 165, ¶¶ 7-8. On their face, these statements contradict one another. (I added the boldface to point up the contradiction).
[23] Deehan testimony, p. 123-124: line 9: "MR. JANSON: If you please turn to page 14 of your testimony, at lines 8 to 11 you state that you are aware that most or all of non-Vermont owners that sold their ownership interests in 2003 appear to have an expectation that they should receive sponsor/power purchasers shares of the excess revenue under the revenue sharing clause. What's your basis for that statement, that awareness? MR. DEEHAN: Statements made to CVPS employees by those sponsors. Now none of them were directly to me, but they were directly to people who I work with and they made it clear that they had an expectation of receiving a share of the revenue sharing clause revenues. MR. JANSON: And that's most or all of those non-Vermont owners? MR. DEEHAN: Yes. That's my understanding."
[24] Bruce Wiggett's pre-filed testimony for Entergy does not actually do the 92.5% calculations, but takes note of the problem as well. He simply assumes a 55% share.
[25] CVPS's July 17, 2009 brief makes precisely this point in its proposed finding #43 on page 18: "There is a significant risk of expensive, time-consuming litigation over this sharing issue. CVPS believes that should a decision, an alternative RSC, a PPA, or some other agreement result in the non-Vermont Sponsor/power purchasers being excluded from sharing in the excess revenues, those parties would likely commence litigation against any or all of Vermont Yankee Nuclear Power Corporation ("VYNPC"), CVPS, GMP, the regulators, and/or any other parties they felt were responsible for that result. Deehan pf. of 2/11/09 at 14. See, Findings 64, 65, below, discussing non-Vermont Sponsor/power purchasers."
[26] References to this claim appear throughout the PSB testimony. For example, Jay Thayer testified on May 20, 2009 as follows: "Q. What is Entergy's position with respect to [p.59]under the revenue sharing agreement, with respect to revenues from capacity sales? Are they included in the sharing or excluded from the sharing? A. For the purposes of our testimony in this case, we have assumed that the revenue sharing clause applies to sales of energy only."
[27] Cf. Paul Chernick's June 1, 2009 testimony from page 162, line 23 to p. 163 line 21.
[28] On page 53 of its July 17, 2009 brief, the DPS makes a recommendation which is guaranteed to fail: "Only arms-length (non-affiliate), commercially reasonable power sales transactions shall be utilized to calculate the unit revenue received for output sold by the plant for purposes of calculating Excess Revenue under the RSA. Structured sales whereby value attributable to the sale of plant output is not paid directly to the plant, or where a monetary substitute is accepted as consideration by the plant in exchange for delivery of output, shall not be considered commercially reasonable sales under this condition. Petitioners shall share data showing actual revenue from sales and VYNPC or purchasing Vermont utilities may challenge the reasonableness of any transaction based on the data received from Petitioners. The Board shall resolve any disputes over such a challenge." If, in accordance with this proposed provision, ENVY were to sell all of their power in a "structured sale," then they would produce no revenues which count towards the RSA, guaranteeing that there would be no sharing. Sorry, but it's back to the drawing board on this one!
[29] For example, the Department's 2007 forecasts for 2012 and following are about 40% higher than their high estimate just 3 years earlier. As of fall 2008, both CVPS and GMP found these estimates too HIGH, though neither was specific, and GMP explicitly refused to share their forecast. Riley Allen, right before he left the Department, told me he thought the forecast was 10-30% too LOW. So much for agreement among the experts! Finally, the above statements concern a forecast which, in turn, by 2008, was considered about 33% too high by everyone except Bruce Wiggett.
Part of the problem is the extreme volatility of electricity prices. For example, in Bill Sherman's testimony in the 2002 case, he noted, "The ISO-New England average market-clearing price for wholesale electric energy (for all hours) for January 2001 was $62.57 per MWH. The corresponding clearing price for January 2002 was $25.49 per MWH." (p. 18)
[30] Cf. the comments of the 2002 PSB: "We note that the $61 strike price is higher than the prices that any party has forecast for wholesale market power in 2012…. Thus, based upon present projections, this sharing provision is not likely to have any value to ratepayers. Nonetheless, it does provide protection should energy market prices change precipitously. (Docket 6545, Order of 6/13/2002 at 71 (footnote 142)(emphasis added)" Quoted at page 5 of J. Randall Pratt's pre-filed testimony of Feb. 11, 2009.
[31] To cite just one striking example, CLF and VPIRG introduced a report which estimates that a Spent fuel pool loss of coolant accident would produce between $167 and $878 billion (that's with a "b") of damages to New England.


text:
cuentasClaras
=============

cuentasClaras


Welcome to my day 5 of my 10 day water fast journey! I just love this experience, which is completely different than my 20 day water fast! Here I give my idea of healthy eating being simple and other post fast issues. Please feel free to friend me and subscribe to Breathetree on YouTube. Also find Breathetree on Facebook and Twitter! Subscribe to the Breathetree Newsletter to receive the latest updates as well as tips and tricks!


An Impessive large wooden storage cabinet with 23 small drawers, 2 × sturdy pullout trays to use as a work surface and 2 cuboards disquised as additional drawers Height - 137cm. 36cm Can be collected if you wish from. The item "LARGE APOTHECARY CABINET HABERDASHERY STORAGE UNIT CHEST OF DRAWERS" is in sale since Wednesday, March 6, 2019. This item is in the category "Home, Furniture & DIY\Furniture\Cabinets & Cupboards".
The seller is "robert8172" and is located in Cheltenham. This item can be shipped to United Kingdom, Austria, Belgium, Bulgaria, Croatia, Cyprus, Czech republic, Denmark, Estonia, Finland, France, Germany, Greece, Hungary, Ireland, Italy, Latvia, Lithuania, Luxembourg, Malta, Netherlands, Poland, Portugal, Romania, Slovakia, Slovenia, Spain, Sweden, Australia, United States, Canada, Brazil, Japan, New Zealand, China, Israel, Hong Kong, Norway, Indonesia, Malaysia, Singapore, South Korea, Switzerland, Taiwan, Thailand, Chile.


For World Mental Health Day we highlight the presence of poor mental health in the construction industry and outline some measures that tradespeople can take to better support their colleagues.
Male construction workers are three times more likely to commit suicide than the average UK male. Now is the time to speak openly about mental health and be on hand to help others.
Nearly a quarter of construction workers are considering leaving the industry within the next year over concerns about their mental health. It shows that the sector has a significant issue with poor mental health.
In recent years there has been noticeable focus on the industry's problem, but the sector is still struggling to properly identify the signs of poor mental health. In fact, a survey last year revealed that 73% of construction workers feel their employers don't recognise the early signs of mental health problems.
Construction workers face a lifestyle that is both physically and mentally challenging and often requires long hours away from home. The 'grin and bear it' approach is widespread across the construction industry and can often lead to tradespeople bottling things up, making the problem worse.
A large number of people won't talk about their mental health due to fear of being judged, humiliated or out of fear of losing their job. But even if someone doesn't verbally raise their issues, there are key indicators to help recognise someone struggling with their mental health.
If you recognise these signs in a colleague, be the person to provide a safety net and check in with them every once in a while. Offer to help where you can, invite them into your group, include them in activities outside of work and where possible, ask if they've considered or are aware of the support available through charity services. Being able to start the conversation can make a huge difference to someone struggling to cope.
Work around the issue has already begun; we were pleased to recently read that 67% of construction workers believe that awareness of mental health has improved over the past year. In order to provide better mental health support, tradespeople need to work together and remove the stigma that associates poor mental health with weakness.
We all have pressures in life and if you were struggling to cope, wouldn't it be nice for someone just to check that we're okay?


text:
Michigan MLS braces for fight with FTC over listings rule
MLS blocks some listings from reaching Realtor.com
by Glenn Roberts Jr. |
Realcomp II Ltd., the largest multiple listing service in Michigan, is preparing for a legal battle with the U.S. Federal Trade Commission over an MLS policy that blocks some property listings from display on public Web sites such as Realtor.com and an MLS-owned home-search site.
The National Association of Realtors earlier this year announced 14 separate government investigations that focused on MLS policies relating to restrictions on the display of some property listings.
The National Association of Realtors earlier this year announced 14 separate government investigations that focused on MLS policies relating to restrictions on the display of some property listings. Inman News has reported on four MLSs contacted by the Federal Trade Commission that have changed their policies.
New Jersey MLS, the Realtors Association of Northeast Wisconsin MLS, the Northern New England Real Estate Network and the Austin Board of Realtors have lifted display restrictions relating to "exclusive agency listings," a type of listing agreement between a home seller and a broker that allows the seller to directly market the home and does not obligate the seller to pay the broker if the seller personally locates a buyer.
While the FTC had proposed an agreement with Realcomp II that would require the MLS to change its policy for exclusive agency listings, the board of directors voted against the agency's proposed consent agreement. Realcomp II is owned by seven local Realtor boards and has about 15,000 members in Southeast Michigan.
Karen Kage, CEO for Realcomp II, said that the MLS has not yet received a formal complaint from FTC officials, though the MLS "received word that they were going to file a formal complaint." The agreement proposed by the FTC was similar to the one that the Austin Board of Realtors signed, Kage said.
In the Austin example, the FTC charged that the MLS rules restrained competition among brokers and represents a joint action by a group of competitors to withhold property information from publicly accessible Web sites. In settling the FTC charges, the Austin Board of Realtors agreed not to interfere with members' ability to enter into any kind of lawful listing agreement with home sellers, and the board also agreed not to adopt or enforce any rules that favor one type of property listing agreement over another.
Realcomp II passed the rule relating to the Web site display of exclusive agency listings in 2004 because of the potential for those listings to facilitate a sale without a Realtor, Kage said. The rule prohibits exclusive agency listings from display on national property-search site Realtor.com, an MLS-owned property-search site at MoveInMichigan.com, and all of its members' sites that feature property information through a data-sharing agreement with other brokers — a standard known as IDX or Internet Data Exchange.
Meanwhile, the rule change did not impose these display restrictions for a more common form of listing agreement called "exclusive right to sell." Under standard exclusive right to sell agreements, a home seller is also allowed to market the home and personally seek out buyers, but the seller must pay the broker regardless of who brings in the buyer.
"Exclusive agency gives the seller the right to sell it themselves and the MLS is in the business of securing sales through the use of a Realtor," Kage said. Exclusive agency listings, because they can facilitate the sale of a home without a Realtor, can fall "outside the scope of what an MLS is." The MLS, she said, is designed to "help the public but through the Realtors. An MLS's job is just to service the Realtors. That is our core function."
In a Sept. 18 statement, Realcomp II announced that the FTC intends to file a formal complaint against the MLS "which asserts that Realcomp II's rules and policies disfavor real estate brokers that employ nontraditional forms of listing agreements."
Kage stated in that announcement, "We have an obligation, first and foremost, to our Realtor customers. The purpose of our MLS is to facilitate the sale of properties between listing and selling agents and, in turn, ensure compensation for both parties. To change our rules and organizational structure, established by our board of governors and agreed to by our broker members, would entirely compromise the purpose of the MLS and the core service we provide to our Realtor participants who pay us to represent their best interests."
Kage said there were less than a dozen questions or comments about the exclusive agency rule since it passed. "It was certainly a very small minority" of members that questioned the rule, she added. Exclusive agency listings now account for about 1 percent of all of the property listings in the MLS database, she said, and prior to the rule the MLS did not differentiate between exclusive agency listings and exclusive right to sell listings.
In March 2006, FTC officials requested information about the MLS policy, Kage said. The MLS received a proposed consent agreement from the FTC on Sept. 14 and the MLS board voted down the agreement on Sept. 15. MLS officials notified FTC officials on Sept. 18 that Realcomp II "would not be moving forward with the consent agreement," Kage said.
"We're not aware of any (MLSs that) have taken a similar stance to what we have," Kage said. If there is a lawsuit, she said that Realcomp II may draw upon its errors and omissions insurance policy to assist with legal costs.
Albert Hepp of BuySelf Realty Inc., a flat-fee real estate company that operates in Michigan and four other states, said he is glad that the FTC is actively investigating MLS policies related to exclusive agency listings. "I think it's very appropriate and needed," he said. He said the exclusive agency rules that block listings from reaching some public Web sites appear to him as "a deliberate action to try to hurt a new form of innovation in the real estate business."
In a public comment to the U.S. Department of Justice in November, Hepp wrote, "Many MLSs only share listings defined as exclusive right to sell through upload to Realtor.com as a way to reduce the exposure of nontraditional listings." In that letter, he also named Realcomp II as an MLS that allows its members to conduct property searches based on types of listing agreements, which he said could allow agents "to screen out" some types of property listings in searches.
Antitrust officials for the FTC and U.S. Department of Justice have weighed in on another real estate issue in the state, too.
Michigan and more than a dozen other states have considered legislation or regulations, in every case backed by state Realtor trade groups, that require real estate licensees to perform a minimum set of services for clients — at least for certain types of service agreements.
Federal officials have opposed the Michigan proposal and some other so-called "minimum-service" measures, charging that they can potentially limit consumer choice and obstruct competition. Meanwhile, proponents have said that the laws protect consumers by ensuring that they receive sufficient services in real estate transactions.
In 2003, Realcomp II defined an exclusive right to sell listing as "a listing where the listing agent offers full service to the sellers." This means that in order to be considered an exclusive right to sell listing by the MLS, a broker must also provide a specific range of services to the client.
The MLS also categorized other listings as either exclusive agency listings, "limited service listings" in which a listing broker does not provide certain services to clients, and "MLS entry only" listings in which a property is entered into the MLS but other traditional real estate services are not offered.
According to a December 2003 notice by Realcomp II, the full-service listing category was set up as the default property search for MLS members, and "if you wish to search for listings matching any of the other listing type choices … you'll need to modify your search criteria accordingly."
In an April 2004 notice, Kage wrote that MLS members frequently ask why Realcomp II accepts all types of property listings. The National Association of Realtors requires MLSs to accept all types of listings, she stated, and the MLS "has been advised from more than one legal counsel to accept and include" all listings. "However, MLSs have the option of requiring that the listing type be clearly identified. So, we implemented mandatory disclosure for everyone's benefit."
And in a June 2004 notice to members, Kage stated that she had spoken with representatives for about 20 MLSs, and "not one of them had made the decision to prohibit the limited service or MLS entry only listings from their database. They reported that they had been advised to accept these listings, but to also establish ways of identifying the level of service being offered."


text:
Trans Visibility Main Menu Trans Visibility Introduction Let's get started! Basics of "Transgender" Christine Jorgenson Laurence Michael Dillon Marsha P. Johnson Shawn Stinson Janet Mock Wren Kauffman Jazz Jennings Interview: Juniper Xiomara Gary Walker-Roberts ff82d71fc8661901c549a69ff80c9bac7b614722
Political Revolution
1 media/speech milestone.PNG 2016-04-03T19:49:15-07:00 Gary Walker-Roberts ff82d71fc8661901c549a69ff80c9bac7b614722 9121 56 Publication: The Experience Newspaper image_header 2016-10-07T20:07:49-07:00 Gary Walker-Roberts ff82d71fc8661901c549a69ff80c9bac7b614722
The Stakes are High for LGBT Rights
** Article published on October 6, 2016: The Experience Newspaper
"Don't boo, VOTE," was a call-to-action by President Obama when he was on the campaign trail not so long ago. As November 8, 2016 draws near, many Americans are focusing on which Presidential candidate they will vote for. This election could be one of the most contentious elections in history, and it is clear that the stakes are high. A specific issue that Americans have to consider is what the climate is like for human rights. All people have the right to be treated equally under the law in our country. Sounds like a easy idea to understand, especially since we are taught in elementary civics class that one of America's key principles is "All men are created equal." This is clearly stated in the second paragraph of the United States Declaration of Independence. "All" is an inclusive word in the English language, but it is too often that word "some," which implies excluding a part of a whole, is applied to rights, policies and laws when being crafted. The United States of America has had historical problems (big problems) marginalizing minority communities, and unjustly "othering" these communities. The result of doing so forces these communities to encounter discriminatory practices and laws. The majority of Americans can agree that we have discriminatory laws; however, American's continue to grapple with systemic discriminatory practices. Thanks to President Obama, LGBT rights, specifically transgender rights, have moved from the margins of society and are now front and center during this election cycle.
An article, "Speech includes LGBT milestone," published in The Experience addresses a major . The fact that President Barack Obama included a marginalized minority group during his State of the Union speech is historical. The power of visibility and inclusivity can never be underestimated. When a minority group receives a welcomed assist from the most powerful leader of the free world, it is important to take a moment to recognize the progress that has made on human rights issues. Moreover, the Obama administration has made great strides on LGBT equality and equity in our country.
For example, the discriminatory "Don't Ask, Don't Tell Policy," that allowed military personnel to be fired based on sexual orientation ended on September 20, 2011. This policy did not end without a fight in Congress. In fact, the 2016 Republican Vice Presidential nominee and current Governor of Indiana, Mike Pence, argued heavily against this human rights initiative. He stated that the repeal was "some liberal domestic social agenda." Furthermore, under the Obama administration in 2015, the discriminatory "Defense of Marriage Act" was repealed. The Pentagon announced in 2016 that they were lifting a long-time ban against transgender people serving openly in the military.
This is one of the last LGBT discrimination barriers that have been removed. The Obama administration has raised the bar on LGBT human rights in our country by treating LGBT discrimination equal to race, religion and gender discrimination. Now transgender military service members can join and thrive openly in our military. Yet, this week, the 2016 Republican Presidential Nominee, Donald Trump, criticized military leaders for being "politically correct" to allow transgender people to serve visibly in the military. Regardless of the Trump-Pence ticket's blatant assault on human rights , we must acknowledge that we, the people, have helped to restore human rights to the LGBT community over the past few years. We have done so on both a macro-national level and on a micro-community level. Let us not forget that the Los Medanos College community has been at the forefront of ensuring that human rights for transgender individuals are met. In 2014, student leaders collaborated with the college administration to create a more inclusive and equitable campus environment through the gender-neutral restroom initiative. The initiative was widely accepted and on par with the Obama Presidency's progressive human rights changes. Subsequently, the transgender community has found themselves with a bigger target on their backs from the opposition after President Obama's State of the Union Speech.
Los Medanos College's newspaper, The Advocate, calls attention to a specific discriminatory law that targets the transgender community subsequently after President Obama elevated the need for equality for transgender people. The Advocate staff states, in the article "Bad Year for acceptance," that America has had a bad year when it comes to human rights progress. It is apparent that "craven attempts by several states to roll back" rights of minorities has taken place this year, states the article. The article points specifically to the "passing of a law in North Carolina restricting bathroom access to trans people." Agreeably, the cultural assessment made by the staff at The Advocate is spot on. North Carolina's Republican Governor, Pat McCrory, signed House Bill 2, or "HB2," into law in a special session earlier this year. The law makes it illegal for transgender individuals, who have not made gender changes medically or legally (gender markers on birth certificates), to utilize the bathroom that matches the gender that they identify with. This law is rooted in discrimination and violates transgender individual's human rights. There are many other states that are proposing similar discriminatory laws: Georgia, Indiana, Kentucky and West Virginia. Regressive laws and policies deserve a huge "Boo," but more importantly a VOTE. America cannot afford a Trump-Pence Administration that aims to reverse the aforementioned human rights progress pertaining to LGBT equality.
It is imperative that our country continue to stay on the course of advancing human rights for the LGBT minority community, especially, the transgender community. Now is the time to listen to President Obama's call-to-action to not "boo, but vote." Voting is extremely imperative during this contentious election year. The Advocate hit the nail on the head when they state, "2016 is the most tolerant, inclusive year in the history of the United States." Voting for a Presidential ticket that will continue the human rights progress will ensure that America's future will be even more tolerant and inclusive. President Obama, by simply giving voice to a marginalized community by using the word "transgender" in a speech on a National platform, advanced human rights in hopes to end discrimination for all minority groups, including the LGBT community. His actions bring hope that America can move the human rights needle in the right direction to uphold one of America's key principles that "All humans are created equal."
This page has paths:
1 media/Janet Mock and me..jpg media/Janet Mock and me..jpg 2016-04-03T17:37:58-07:00 Gary Walker-Roberts ff82d71fc8661901c549a69ff80c9bac7b614722 Let's get started! Gary Walker-Roberts 54 image_header 2016-10-06T21:45:08-07:00 Gary Walker-Roberts ff82d71fc8661901c549a69ff80c9bac7b614722
Contents of this path:
1 2016-04-03T18:52:57-07:00 Basics of "Transgender" 44 plain 259508 2016-10-04T12:25:19-07:00
1 2016-04-03T16:52:43-07:00 Christine Jorgenson 18 image_header 2016-04-29T19:27:29-07:00
1 2016-04-28T23:41:06-07:00 Laurence Michael Dillon 11 image_header 2016-04-29T18:29:45-07:00
1 2016-04-03T17:21:54-07:00 Marsha P. Johnson 8 image_header 2016-04-29T19:29:30-07:00
1 2016-04-28T22:13:23-07:00 Shawn Stinson 21 image_header 259487 2016-10-06T20:28:30-07:00
1 2016-04-03T16:15:29-07:00 Janet Mock 53 image_header 276910 2016-10-06T23:18:47-07:00
1 2016-04-29T08:16:37-07:00 Wren Kauffman 17 image_header 2016-09-21T23:13:05-07:00
1 2016-04-03T17:02:57-07:00 Jazz Jennings 28 image_header 2016-10-04T20:40:49-07:00
1 media/beginning #1.JPG media/juniper.JPG 2016-10-02T22:42:45-07:00 Interview: Juniper Xiomara 39 image_header 259545 2016-10-04T21:07:24-07:00
1 media/speech milestone.PNG 2016-04-03T19:49:15-07:00 Political Revolution 56 Publication: The Experience Newspaper image_header 2016-10-07T20:07:49-07:00
This page references:
1 2016-10-04T12:22:50-07:00 Obama's State of Union Address - Gay excerpts (1-22-15) 1 President Obama included the LGBT community twice in his speech. Of note, he purposely listed "lesbian" before "gay." CNN's Jake Tapper points out that this is ... plain 2016-10-04T12:22:50-07:00 YouTube 2015-01-25T04:14:12.000Z _5U0pAEfioY lgbtTV5
1 2016-10-04T12:34:01-07:00 Pence Opposes Don't Ask, Don't Tell Repeal 1 Congressman Mike Pence on the House floor. plain 2016-10-04T12:34:01-07:00 YouTube 2010-12-15T22:31:45.000Z vjWMNrwaRQY CongressmanMikePence
1 2016-10-04T12:42:16-07:00 President Obama: "Don't Boo—Vote!" - Las Vegas, Nevada 1 Share this: http://OFA.BO/kytj8J Tweet this: http://OFA.BO/PRNiPi President Obama ended his two-day tour of Ohio and Nevada with a grassroots event in Las ... plain 2016-10-04T12:42:16-07:00 YouTube 2012-08-22T22:09:36.000Z X4iYODJyV_g BarackObamadotcom