As an economist I always try to find the simplest, cheapest, and most effective solutions to society's problems. However, whereas mere mediocre economists talk about multi-factor productivity, education, etc., the reason I'm one of the best economists is because I do something most others don't.I think outside the box.And so, just like I was (in theory) able to prevent the Dotcom Bubble, the Asian Currency Crisis, the Housing Bubble, Education Bubble, and Retirement Bubble, I have found a way to bring the epidemic of sexual harassment and sexual assault to a screeching halt, and at practically no expense to America.Force men to work from home.It seems to me that "boys are just going to be boys" and while I know feminists, academians, HR departments, CSR departments, and non-profits are doing their best to eliminate toxic masculinity and bring out the more feminine side of men, until that noble goal is achieved, it may be best to avail ourselves of already available technology and require that men only work from home.This will bring about a lot of benefits to society that go well beyond ending work place sexual harassment and assault. Women won't be bothered by men at the office or in the downtown eateries come lunch time. They will not be harassed, allowing for much safer work place environments. An all-women workplace environment will FINALLY come to fruition allowing them the chance to excel that was traditionally the preserve of men. Plus, the highways won't be as crowded come the morning and evening commutes. One might even say this would force men to be the house husbands, forcing them to see what it was like to be oppressed as a stay at home mom.I'm not advocating necessarily that we eliminate choice from men and as to what their work options are. I'm merely suggesting that corporations, schools, universities, and other employers exercise their rights as private employers insist their male employees, workers and students simply work and study from home. It will bring about the immediate end of work place sexual assault, prevent crises like Hollywood's current sexual assault affair from happening in the future, put a dead stop to the campus rape epidemic that is occurring now, and finally give women the shot they deserve at equality.HHR4HM7ZPMV3
Расскажем, как установить SSL-сертификаты в Zimbra. После активации SSL-кода с кодом CSR и выполнения всех требований к проверке, сертификат SSL будет выдан и отправлен на ваш адрес электронной почты. Когда сертификат будет получен, вы можете начать процесс установки. Почтовый сервер Zimbra поддерживает два возможных способа установки SSL: консоль администрирования zimbra (веб-интерфейс) zimbra certificate manager (интерфейс командной строки) Читать дальше →
We showcase Arrow’s solution capabilities in a very approachable way, and our projects clearly distinguish us from our competitors. We don’t replace marketing and business development, but these projects spark important new conversations.
Rather than reputation, businesses need to focus their CSR efforts on what really matters — impact.
Shrinking enrollment will erode the markets politically — and weaken them, practically.
Here's How Much Your Obamacare Rates Are Going Up In 2018 (Hint: It's A Lot And It's All Trump's Fault)
A new study conducted by Avalere and released earlier today found that Obamacare rates will surge an average of 34% across the country in 2018. Of course, this is in addition to the 113% average premium increase from 2013 and 2017, which brings the total 5-year increase to a staggering 185%. Meanwhile, and to our complete shock no less, Avalere would like for you to know that the rate increases are almost entirely due to the Trump administration's "failure to pay for cost-sharing reductions"...which is a completely reasonable guess if you're willing to ignore the fact that 2018 premium increases are roughly in-line with the 29% constantly annualized growth rates experienced over the past 4 years before Trump ever moved into the White House...but that's just math so who cares? New analysis from Avalere finds that the 2018 exchange market will see silver premiums rise by an average of 34%. According to Avalere’s analysis of filings from Healthcare.gov states, exchange premiums for the most popular type of exchange plan (silver) will be 34% higher, on average, compared to last year. “Plans are raising premiums in 2018 to account for market uncertainty and the federal government’s failure to pay for cost-sharing reductions,” said Caroline Pearson, senior vice president at Avalere. “These premium increases may allow insurers to remain in the market and enrollees in all regions to have access to coverage.” Avalere experts attribute premium increases to a number of factors, including elimination of cost-sharing reduction (CSR) payments, lower than anticipated enrollment in the marketplace, limited insurer participation, insufficient action by the government to reimburse plans that cover higher cost enrollees (e.g., via risk corridors), and general volatility around the policies governing the exchanges. The vast majority of exchange enrollees are subsidized and can avoid premium increases, if they select the lowest or second lowest cost silver plan in their region. However, some unsubsidized consumers who pay the full premium cost may choose not to enroll for 2018 due to premium increases. Of course, not all residents are treated equally when it comes to premium hikes. So far, Iowa is winning the award for greatest percentage increase at 69%, with Wyoming, Utah and Virginia close behind. On an absolute basis, Wyoming wins with the average 50 year old expected to drop nearly $1,200 per month (or roughly the cost of a mortgage) on health insurance premiums. So what say you? Have we finally reached the tipping point where enough full-paying Obamacare customers will simply forego insurance that they can no longer afford and cause the whole system to come crashing down?
Vince Chhabria failed to see the immediate threat to consumers that would require him to compel the federal government to make the payments.
Robert E. Moffit Politics, Americas President Trump’s action is already reigniting Capitol Hill seriousness on health policy. The central issue is health-care cost, especially the affordability of insurance. President Donald Trump has decided to stop the flow of Obamacare’s “cost-sharing” subsidies. These are special subsidies to reduce out-of-pocket costs for low-income people in the health insurance exchanges. Put down the smelling salts. This is not catastrophic. The vast majority of low-income people getting federal subsidies in the Obamacare health insurance exchanges are going to be OK. On the other hand, Trump’s decision won’t save taxpayers any money. In fact, it will hike federal spending, as well as add to the deficit. Obamacare’s subsidy structure is complicated. Enrollees in a health insurance exchange who have annual incomes between 100 and 400 percent of the federal poverty are eligible for Obamacare’s generous premium subsidies. Almost nine out of ten enrollees qualify for these subsidies. A subgroup of these people—those with incomes between 100 and 250 percent of the federal poverty level are also eligible for an additional set of subsidies: “cost-sharing reduction” (CSR) subsidies. About six million people fall in this category. For 2017, a single person in this income category would have an annual income between $12,060 and $30,150. Like the premium subsidies, the amount is adjusted by family size. Cost-sharing subsidies are available for people enrolled in the standard (aka “silver”) health plans, in which 70 percent of the costs are covered by the insurance. These subsidies—estimated to be $7 billion annually—go directly to the insurers to offset the out-of-pocket costs that they pick up on behalf of their enrollees. So, what happens to the people affected by the cut-off of subsidies to the insurers? Read full article
**Must-Read**: * **Olivier Blanchard and Lawrence Summers**: [Rethinking macro stabilization: Back to the future](https://piie.com/system/files/documents/0-blanchard20171012ppt.pdf): "Lessons from past crises... * **Tim Duy**: [Kevin Warsh, Very Serious Person](http://economistsview.typepad.com/timduy/2017/10/kevin-warsh-very-serious-person.html): "Scott Sumner is perplexed by... Kevin Warsh['s in 2010]... * **Noah Smith**: [Defending Thaler from the guerrilla resistance](http://noahpinionblog.blogspot.ch/2017/10/defending-thaler-from-guerrilla.html): "This... by Kevin Bryan... [who] instead of explaining Thaler's research, Kevin decided to challenge it, in a rather dismissive manner... * **Royal Swedish Academy of Sciences**: [The Prize in Economic Sciences 2017](https://www.nobelprize.org/nobel_prizes/economic-sciences/laureates/2017/press.html): "Richard H. Thaler... 'for his contributions to behavioural economics'... * **Simon Wren-Lewis**: [ Economics: too much ideology, too little craft](https://mainlymacro.blogspot.ch/2017/10/economics-too-much-ideology-too-little.html): "Paul Krugman argued... that... belief in the need for new economic thinking after the financial crisis was incorrect... * **Wolfgang Dauth, Sebastian Findeisen, Jens Südekum, and Nicole Woessner**: The rise of robots in the German labour market: "Robots have had no aggregate effect on German employment, and robot exposure is found to actually increase the chances of workers staying with their original employer... ---- **Should-Read**: * **Paul Krugman**: [Subsidies, Spite, and Supply Chains](https://krugman.blogs.nytimes.com/2017/10/15/subsidies-spite-and-supply-chains/?_r=0): "I’ve been fairly complacent about NAFTA’s fate... * **@delong @pseudoerasmus @leahboustan**: [On Twitter: What high skilled jobs did the domestication of the horse eliminate?](https://twitter.com/de1ong/status/919232243062620160): "**@leah_boustan**: @pseudoerasmus @de1ong To me, robot has...
**Over at [Equitable Growth](http://EquitableGrowth.org): Must- and Should-Reads:** * **@delong @pseudoerasmus @leahboustan**: [On Twitter: What high skilled jobs did the domestication of the horse eliminate?](https://twitter.com/de1ong/status/919232243062620160): "**@leah_boustan**: @pseudoerasmus @de1ong To me, robot has connotation of 'artificial intelligence' so CNC would be robot-like but assembly line would not be... * **Geoffrey Pulham** (2013): Why Are We Still Waiting for Natural Language Processing?: "Try typing this, or any question with roughly the same meaning, into the Google search box... * **Luigi Iovino and Dmitriy Sergeyev**: [Quantitative Easing without Rational Expectations ](https://doc-08-7k-apps-viewer.googleusercontent.com/viewer/secure/pdf/a1btvsgnejmih0tb0ttba3oilpop11lj/atq15c3au6lo1qhscs2lf52pno1fkd18/1507328775000/drive/02692221382700491084/ACFrOgA35b411WPudePDEhZenQvZz4sHup7JC7EYq5Er4AhU0OI1HYcWjD7wbXP2n-Jr0WQEgo_pf5sZyxBMM1MbXTR4O4bFAv40iJpubv6bKqQPDO08uKTcGCjBJco=?print=true&nonce=bvt3h45f7dld2&user=02692221382700491084&hash=sh42677vd72q99gt59ksltoh1v95vn9m): "We study the effects of risky assets purchases financed by issuance of riskless debt by the government (quantitative easing) in a model without rational expectations... * **Bruce Bartlett**: [I helped create the GOP tax myth. Trump is wrong: Tax cuts don’t equal growth](https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/posteverything/wp/2017/09/28/i-helped-create-the-gop-tax-myth-trump-is-wrong-tax-cuts-dont-equal-growth/): "Even if they had released a complete plan — not just the woefully incomplete nine-page outline released Wednesday... * **Paul Krugman**: [Lies, Lies, Lies, Lies, Lies, Lies, Lies, Lies, Lies, Lies](https://krugman.blogs.nytimes.com/2017/10/14/lies-lies-lies-lies-lies-lies-lies-lies-lies-lies/?smid=tw-share): "Modern conservatives have been lying about taxes pretty much from the beginning of their movement... * **Simon Wren-Lewis**: [How Neoliberals weaponise the concept of an ideal market](https://mainlymacro.blogspot.co.uk/2017/10/how-neoliberals-weaponise-concept-of.html): "I would tend to suggest... * **Martin Wolf**: [A political shadow looms...
South Lawn 1:38 P.M. EDT Q What do you say to critics who say that you ending the CSRs, the subsidies under Obamacare, will throw the markets into chaos? THE PRESIDENT: What it's going to do is it's going to be time to negotiate healthcare that's going to be good for everybody. That money is a subsidy for insurance companies. Take a look at their stocks. Look where they are. They're going through the roof, from past -- I don’t know about today. But the insurance companies that made a fortune, that money was a subsidy and almost, you could say, a payoff for insurance companies. And what we have to do is come up with great healthcare. Now, that's what I did partially yesterday; that's going to cover a big segment. But now, for the rest, we have to come up with great -- whether it's going to be block grants or something else. And we just about have the votes. Now, if the Democrats were smart, what they'd do is come and negotiate something where people could really get the kind of healthcare that they deserve, being citizens of our great country. Q Mr. President, on the Iranian nuclear deal, why not just scrap it altogether now? You threatened to do so. Why not just end it now, withdraw? THE PRESIDENT: Because we'll see what happens over the next short period of time. And I can do that instantaneously. I like a two-step process much better. Q (Inaudible) healthcare? THE PRESIDENT: Because I think what we'll do is we'll be able to renegotiate so that everybody gets to. We just took care of a big chunk, and now we'll take care of the other chunk. What would be nice -- if the Democratic leaders could come over to the White House, we'll negotiate some deal that's good for everybody. That's what I'd like. But they're always a block vote against everything. They're like obstructionists. If they came over, maybe we could make a deal. But the subsidy is really a subsidy to the insurance company. That's not going to people; that's making the insurance companies rich. Q Mr. President, you had said you were going to rip the Iran deal up, and you called it the worst ever. THE PRESIDENT: Well, I may do that. I may do that. The deal is terrible. So what we've done is, through the certification process, we'll have Congress take a look at it, and I may very well do that. But I like a two-step process much better. John. Q The moves that you've made on Obamacare here, with the executive order yesterday and then removing the subsidies -- THE PRESIDENT: We have great support. Q -- is that a way for you to put pressure on Democrats and say, look, you're going to lose it -- come to the table and negotiate with them? THE PRESIDENT: Well, they've already lost a big chunk, because as you know that's a big chunk and it's very popular. And you will have millions and millions of people sign up under that. You could say -- I mean, I'm not doing that consciously. I will say this, John -- I will say that the Democrats should come to me; I would even go to them. Because I'm only interested in one thing: getting great healthcare for this country. That was a big chunk. And as far as the subsidy is concerned, I don’t want to make the insurance companies rich. If you look at their stock price over the last number of years, take a look at what's happened with those insurance companies. They're making a fortune by getting that kind of money. Q How long will you give Rex Tillerson to get this new deal? And are strikes on Iran still a possibility if you don’t get what you want? THE PRESIDENT: We will see what happens with Iran. We're very unhappy with Iran. They have not treated us with the kind of respect that they should be treating. They should have thanked Barack Obama for making that deal. They were gone. They were economically gone. He infused $100 [billion] to $150 billion into their economy. He gave them $1.7 billion in cash. And they should be, "Thank you, President Obama." They didn’t say that. Q On opioids, your wife is with you. She's been talking about the opioid crisis. You said you would declare a national emergency more than two months ago. What's taking so long? THE PRESIDENT: We are studying national emergency right now. Believe it or not, doing national emergency, as you understand, is a very big statement. We will be doing that. My wife, Melania, who happens to be right here, finds that subject to be of such vital importance, and she's very much involved. And as you know, she's on the committee and really wants to be involved in that process. Q Have you spoken with Theresa May or Emmanuel Macron about the Iranian Deal? THE PRESIDENT: Yes. Q What did they say to you? What did you say to them? THE PRESIDENT: They would love me to stay in, only for one reason: Look at the kind of money that's being sent. You know, Iran is spending money in various countries. And I've always said it, and I say to them: Don't do anything. Don't worry about it. Take all the money you can get. They're all friends of mine. Actually, Emmanuel called up, and he talked to me. And I said, look, Emmanuel, they just gave Renault a lot of money. Take their money; enjoy yourselves. But we'll see what happens. Iran has to behave much differently. Q You promised that you would help people who are struggling. The CSR payment looks like it will hurt low-income people. THE PRESIDENT: The CSR payments, if you take a look at CSR payments, that money is going to insurance companies to prop up insurance companies. Q To help lower-income people. THE PRESIDENT: That money is going to insurance companies to lift up their stock price, and that's not what I'm about. Take a look at who those insurance companies support, and I guarantee you one thing: It's not Donald Trump. Q So you don’t think it will raise premiums at all? Q Mr. President, the JCPOA fix that's being floated by Senators Cotton, Corker, and Rubio that would remove the sunset provisions, strengthen IAEA inspections, do some other things. Does that meet the bar for you, or do you need more? THE PRESIDENT: Well, I think we're going to take a look, John, at what happens. We're going to see what happens. We're going to see what they come back with. They may come back with something that's very satisfactory to me, and if they don't, within a very short period of time, I'll terminate the deal. And as far as Puerto Rico is concerned, I love Puerto Rico. Q (Inaudible) going down to Puerto Rico, and saying you won't stay there forever. You didn't say that about Texas or Louisiana. You said it about Puerto Rico. Why? THE PRESIDENT: We've done a great job. We've done a great job in Puerto Rico. Puerto Rico has to get the infrastructure going. We're helping them with their infrastructure. But most important on Puerto Rico is their electric plants are essentially gone. Now, they were gone before the hurricane; they were in bankruptcy, they owed $9 billion -- I think it was $9 billion. But the plants, as you know, were -- the electric was a disaster. After the storm, even more so. We have to help them get the plants rebuilt. That's a long-term project, unfortunately. But we have to help them. But I love the people of Puerto Rico, and we're going to help them. Q On Puerto Rico, Mr. President, do you want to make sure that there remains a very bright line between hurricane relief and debt relief so that the two don’t become so mingled? THE PRESIDENT: Well, you have to watch -- you can't say there was a hurricane, and now we're going to spend X dollars. And we also have to do something with all the money that's been invested, mostly private. The government is going to have to become before that money, because the government is going to want security. They're going to have to become before that money. And I'm sure we'll be able to work that out. But the Puerto Rican people have tremendous spirit. When I was there and I looked at the way that -- what they have to go through. They have a lot of problems. We're going to help them straighten it out. Q Could you clarify where you are on North Korea? You raised some eyebrows when you said this is "the calm before the storm." What's next on North Korea? THE PRESIDENT: We're going to see what happens with North Korea. That's all I can say. We're going to see what happens. We're totally prepared for numerous things. We are going to see what happens with North Korea. I will say, look, if something can happen where we negotiate, I'm always open to that. But if it's going to be something other than negotiation, believe me, we are ready, more so than we have ever been. Thank you very much. Thank you. END 1:46 P.M. EDT
President Donald Trump discontinued CSR (cost-sharing reduction payments) subsidies, a move that will hurt insurers and consumers. The timing just before open enrollment makes it worse.
Консолидация в отрасли железнодорожного машиностроения резко ускорилась после слияния китайских CNR и CSR в крупнейшую в мире железнодорожную машиностроительную корпорацию CRRC в 2014 году
Одной из основных "фишек" этой модели беспроводных полноразмерных наушников стала поддержка кодека aptX. Кроме того, цена данного Bluetooth-аксессуара с высокой автономностью оказывается весьма привлекательной. Вести.Hi-tech, выяснив возможности Ausdom M05, долго наслаждались любимыми хитами в хорошем качестве, обойдясь, при этом, без проводов.
Французская Alstom и немецкая Siemens приняли решение объединить активы в железнодорожном машиностроении. По прогнозам сторон, выручка нового железнодорожного гиганта составит 15,3 млрд евро, ежегодная синергия от объединения оценивается в 470 млн евро.
Правительство Франции одобрило слияние французской машиностроительной компании Alstom с железнодорожным подразделением немецкого концерна Siemens. Об этом сегодня сообщила FT со ссылкой на источники, знакомые с ходом переговоров. Это означает, что уже в ближайшее время обе компании могут официально объявить о сделке.В рамках слияния немецкий концерн получит около половины акций французской компании, годовая выручка объединенной компании составит около €16 млрд. Эксперты уверены, что слияние европейских машиностроительных компаний в области железнодорожного транспорта связано с растущей конкуренцией со стороны китайских производителей высокоскоростных железных дорог и составов. «После создания китайского гиганта CRRC в 2015 году (путем слияния двух китайских государственных компаний — CNR и CSR.— “Ъ”) Siemens стала все громче говорить о необходимости консолидации на европейском рынке железнодорожного транспорта»,— цитирует британское издание аналитика банка Barclays Джеймса Стетлера.
The Trump administration is keeping a key pillar of Obamacare intact while Congress makes a final attempt to gut the law.Subsidy payments due this week that would continue to defray the cost of covering some Obamacare customers will be paid this week, according to a White House spokesman. President Donald Trump has repeatedly threatened to cut off the payments — estimated at $7 billion for this year — that insurers rely on to reduce out-of-pocket costs for low-income Obamacare customers. But so far he has not acted on that threat, which if he did, could tip the Obamacare markets into disarray. “No final decisions have been made about future CSR payments,” the spokesman said in a statement. “We are weighing our options and still evaluating the issues.”House Republicans sued to block the payments in 2014, arguing that they were illegally funded, and prevailed at the lower court level. That decision was appealed by the Department of Justice, but the Trump administration has not decided whether it will continue fighting the lawsuit. If the payments disappear, insurers would still be on the hook to provide lower out-of-pocket costs for their customers. That’s raised the prospect that they could bolt from wobbly Obamacare markets, potentially leading to their collapse. Insures in most states have to make final decisions about 2018 market participation next week.
The U.S private health insurers have been incurring mounting losses from the health insurance marketplace. This has led many of them to pull back participation, worsening the scenario for underprivileged Americans.