question
stringlengths 11
149
| article
stringlengths 529
63.5k
| summary
stringlengths 4
444
| model source
stringclasses 3
values | length bucket
int8 0
2
| url
stringlengths 35
310
| qa classifier score
float32 0.1
0.85
|
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
How Safe Is Eaton and Its Dividend? | Eaton (NYSE: ETN) is offering investors a generous 3.7% yield today, well above what you'd get from an S&P 500 index fund. The stock, however, is down 16% over the past year. Earnings have been good lately, but the company operates globally in the industrial sector, which is highly cyclical. With investors increasingly concerned about worldwide economic growth, it's time to see if Eaton can sustain that dividend if it hits a rough patch. The business Eaton operates five main businesses: Electrical products (around 33% of revenue), electrical systems and services (28%), vehicle (16%), hydraulic (12%), and aerospace (9%). It started up a sixth division in 2018 called eMobility to serve the electric vehicle market, but it remains tiny at just 1.5% of revenue. The key takeaway here, however, is that Eaton has a fairly diversified business, with operations that do well at different points in the economic cycle. That's not to suggest that a downturn won't hurt, but that the company's business is built to weather such storms. Two men looking at blueprints above a factory floor More Image source: Getty Images. Eaton is also fairly well diversified globally, with about 54% of revenue from the United States, 22% from Europe, 12% from the Asia-Pacific region, 7% from Latin America, and 5% from Canada. Clearly the economic ups and downs in North America will have the biggest impact on Eaton's business. However, it has a broad reach that, when combined with its portfolio, should allow it to get through downturns in relative stride. Eaton is simply too large and diverse a company to get into every nook and cranny, but that's the point. It has its business spread well enough that there's little reason to be concerned about any one segment. This also gives management the ability to actively manage its portfolio via acquisitions and dispositions, adjusting the business over time so it is positioned for long-term growth. This is a common theme throughout the company's 100-plus-year history. To put some numbers on the results of all of this, during the deep 2007 to 2009 recession, earnings dipped into the red in just a single quarter. Trailing-12-month earnings, however, stayed in positive territory throughout the downturn. In other words, Eaton got hit by an economic hurricane and survived without too much pain because it is specifically built to withstand such blows. Surviving a downturn is one thing; continuing to pay a dividend throughout a soft patch is another. Eaton is currently working on a nine-year streak of annual dividend increases. It has a history of regular annual hikes stretching much further back, though. Its prior streak ended when management paused dividend hikes about a decade ago to work through the recession. Notably, though, it didn't cut the dividend. So there's a clear desire on management's part to reward investors with regular dividend increases. | Eaton's dividend is 3.7%, but the stock is down 16% over the past year. Eaton operates five main businesses: Electrical products, electrical systems and services, vehicle, hydraulic and aerospace. | ctrlsum | 1 | https://news.yahoo.com/safe-eaton-dividend-163100415.html | 0.216681 |
How Safe Is Eaton and Its Dividend? | Eaton (NYSE: ETN) is offering investors a generous 3.7% yield today, well above what you'd get from an S&P 500 index fund. The stock, however, is down 16% over the past year. Earnings have been good lately, but the company operates globally in the industrial sector, which is highly cyclical. With investors increasingly concerned about worldwide economic growth, it's time to see if Eaton can sustain that dividend if it hits a rough patch. The business Eaton operates five main businesses: Electrical products (around 33% of revenue), electrical systems and services (28%), vehicle (16%), hydraulic (12%), and aerospace (9%). It started up a sixth division in 2018 called eMobility to serve the electric vehicle market, but it remains tiny at just 1.5% of revenue. The key takeaway here, however, is that Eaton has a fairly diversified business, with operations that do well at different points in the economic cycle. That's not to suggest that a downturn won't hurt, but that the company's business is built to weather such storms. Two men looking at blueprints above a factory floor More Image source: Getty Images. Eaton is also fairly well diversified globally, with about 54% of revenue from the United States, 22% from Europe, 12% from the Asia-Pacific region, 7% from Latin America, and 5% from Canada. Clearly the economic ups and downs in North America will have the biggest impact on Eaton's business. However, it has a broad reach that, when combined with its portfolio, should allow it to get through downturns in relative stride. Eaton is simply too large and diverse a company to get into every nook and cranny, but that's the point. It has its business spread well enough that there's little reason to be concerned about any one segment. This also gives management the ability to actively manage its portfolio via acquisitions and dispositions, adjusting the business over time so it is positioned for long-term growth. This is a common theme throughout the company's 100-plus-year history. To put some numbers on the results of all of this, during the deep 2007 to 2009 recession, earnings dipped into the red in just a single quarter. Trailing-12-month earnings, however, stayed in positive territory throughout the downturn. In other words, Eaton got hit by an economic hurricane and survived without too much pain because it is specifically built to withstand such blows. Surviving a downturn is one thing; continuing to pay a dividend throughout a soft patch is another. Eaton is currently working on a nine-year streak of annual dividend increases. It has a history of regular annual hikes stretching much further back, though. Its prior streak ended when management paused dividend hikes about a decade ago to work through the recession. Notably, though, it didn't cut the dividend. So there's a clear desire on management's part to reward investors with regular dividend increases. | Eaton's dividend is 3.7%, but the stock is down 16% over the past year. Eaton operates five main businesses: Electrical products, electrical systems and services, vehicle (16%), hydraulic (12%), and aerospace (9%) Eaton is also fairly well diversified globally, with about 54% of revenue from the United States. | ctrlsum | 2 | https://news.yahoo.com/safe-eaton-dividend-163100415.html | 0.208858 |
Are the U.S. and Russia in a new Cold War? | The revelation of Russian interference in the 2016 presidential elections caught Americans by surprise. As we learn more about how the Russian intelligence agencies, state-controlled media and various proxies worked to influence the U.S. elections in an effort to undermine trust in the electoral process and further divide Americans, many are asking if the United States and Russia are in a new Cold War. But, as we know, the Cold War didnt end in the Soviet Unions favor. During the Cold War, the world seemed more neatly divided into a competition between two superpowers. Americans were taught that the Communists were the bad guys (and Soviet citizens were taught about the evils and hypocrisy of the West). After the fall of the Soviet Union in 1991, however, the United States reigned as the sole superpower. Without the evil empire to oppose, successive U.S. administrations vacillated on the level of focus on Russia and in offering a strategic vision for the newly liberated post-Soviet republics. Each president seemed convinced that he could fix the Russia problem through a close personal relationship with the Russian leader. President Bill Clinton developed a close bond with Boris Yeltsin, and sought to integrate Russia into international institutions, such as the G-8, while at the same time pursuing policies that Yeltsin categorically opposed, most notably the U.S.-led bombing of Serbia. After Yeltsins handpicked successor, Vladimir Putin, took the reins in the Kremlin, President George W. Bush infamously said that he looked into Putins eyes and saw his soul (a comment he would later come to regret). Putin invaded Georgia at the end of Bushs term. Yet, just a year later in 2009, with Putin briefly handing over the presidency to Dmitry Medvedev (but undoubtedly remaining as the decision-maker), the Obama administration was ready for a fresh start. The Obama reset soured quickly however when Putin returned to the presidency in 2012, intent to redefine the relationship with the West as an adversarial one. Relations between Russia and the West took a nosedive in 2014. As Ukrainians rose up in a mass democratic movement to depose a corrupt, Kremlin-controlled leader, Viktor Yanukovich, the Kremlin seized the opportunity to invade Ukraine, taking over Ukraines Crimean peninsula and starting a proxy war in Ukraines east. The United States and Europe responded by imposing economic sanctions on Russia and providing financial and military support to help the Ukrainians defend themselves against further Russian aggression. Similarly, President Trump came into office seeking closer and better relations with Russia. Despite those stated intentions, U.S.-Russia relations have continued to unravel: Congress forced his administration to impose more sanctions on Russian businesses and oligarchs; the U.S. expelled 60 Russian diplomats in response to the attempt by Russian agents to poison a former Russian intelligence officer in the U.K.; and, the White House has pulled out of a Soviet-era arms-control treaty citing rampant Russian violations. that the American people are more confused about U.S.-Russia relations than during the Cold War years. Putin skillfully plays with this ambiguity: He has carefully crafted an image that often contradicts reality. In this image, he plays the roles simultaneously of defender of Christian values (even though the majority of Russians are not religious); savior of Russia from economic destitution (even though under his rule the Russian economy entered a period of stagnation and 25 percent of Russians are too poor to have an indoor toilet); and a strong leader as compared with the weak democratically elected leaders in the West (even though most Westerners who visit Russia outside the glitz of Moscow would likely not want to live there). If it wasnt clear before, it should be clear by now: Putins Russia is an adversary of the United States. The Kremlin needs to have an external enemy to distract the Russian people from the problems plaguing their country. Putin, however, is no fool he understands the limits of Russian capacities and ability to project power. Russia is no match to the United States economically, militarily, or in terms of its appeal to others. The Russian president understands that to win, you dont have to be better than everyone else; everyone else just has to do a little worse. And this is why the Kremlin has launched a strategy of political warfare against the West in the form of disinformation campaigns, support for far-right political parties in Europe, cyberattacks, money laundering, and other tools of influence that allow Moscow to undermine its perceived adversaries at very little cost. After all, its cheaper to open an internet troll farm than to build tanks and invest in sustainable economic growth. And if the Russians can cause so much damage with so little, others who see the United States as an enemy are sure to follow suit. Alina Polyakova is a fellow at the Brookings Institution and an adjunct professor of European studies at the Paul H. Nitze School of Advanced International Studies at Johns Hopkins University. | Julian Zelizer: U.S. and Russia are in a new Cold War, but it didn't end in the Soviet Union's favor. | ctrlsum | 0 | https://www.sfchronicle.com/opinion/openforum/article/Are-the-U-S-and-Russia-in-a-new-Cold-War-13546860.php | 0.430147 |
Are the U.S. and Russia in a new Cold War? | The revelation of Russian interference in the 2016 presidential elections caught Americans by surprise. As we learn more about how the Russian intelligence agencies, state-controlled media and various proxies worked to influence the U.S. elections in an effort to undermine trust in the electoral process and further divide Americans, many are asking if the United States and Russia are in a new Cold War. But, as we know, the Cold War didnt end in the Soviet Unions favor. During the Cold War, the world seemed more neatly divided into a competition between two superpowers. Americans were taught that the Communists were the bad guys (and Soviet citizens were taught about the evils and hypocrisy of the West). After the fall of the Soviet Union in 1991, however, the United States reigned as the sole superpower. Without the evil empire to oppose, successive U.S. administrations vacillated on the level of focus on Russia and in offering a strategic vision for the newly liberated post-Soviet republics. Each president seemed convinced that he could fix the Russia problem through a close personal relationship with the Russian leader. President Bill Clinton developed a close bond with Boris Yeltsin, and sought to integrate Russia into international institutions, such as the G-8, while at the same time pursuing policies that Yeltsin categorically opposed, most notably the U.S.-led bombing of Serbia. After Yeltsins handpicked successor, Vladimir Putin, took the reins in the Kremlin, President George W. Bush infamously said that he looked into Putins eyes and saw his soul (a comment he would later come to regret). Putin invaded Georgia at the end of Bushs term. Yet, just a year later in 2009, with Putin briefly handing over the presidency to Dmitry Medvedev (but undoubtedly remaining as the decision-maker), the Obama administration was ready for a fresh start. The Obama reset soured quickly however when Putin returned to the presidency in 2012, intent to redefine the relationship with the West as an adversarial one. Relations between Russia and the West took a nosedive in 2014. As Ukrainians rose up in a mass democratic movement to depose a corrupt, Kremlin-controlled leader, Viktor Yanukovich, the Kremlin seized the opportunity to invade Ukraine, taking over Ukraines Crimean peninsula and starting a proxy war in Ukraines east. The United States and Europe responded by imposing economic sanctions on Russia and providing financial and military support to help the Ukrainians defend themselves against further Russian aggression. Similarly, President Trump came into office seeking closer and better relations with Russia. Despite those stated intentions, U.S.-Russia relations have continued to unravel: Congress forced his administration to impose more sanctions on Russian businesses and oligarchs; the U.S. expelled 60 Russian diplomats in response to the attempt by Russian agents to poison a former Russian intelligence officer in the U.K.; and, the White House has pulled out of a Soviet-era arms-control treaty citing rampant Russian violations. that the American people are more confused about U.S.-Russia relations than during the Cold War years. Putin skillfully plays with this ambiguity: He has carefully crafted an image that often contradicts reality. In this image, he plays the roles simultaneously of defender of Christian values (even though the majority of Russians are not religious); savior of Russia from economic destitution (even though under his rule the Russian economy entered a period of stagnation and 25 percent of Russians are too poor to have an indoor toilet); and a strong leader as compared with the weak democratically elected leaders in the West (even though most Westerners who visit Russia outside the glitz of Moscow would likely not want to live there). If it wasnt clear before, it should be clear by now: Putins Russia is an adversary of the United States. The Kremlin needs to have an external enemy to distract the Russian people from the problems plaguing their country. Putin, however, is no fool he understands the limits of Russian capacities and ability to project power. Russia is no match to the United States economically, militarily, or in terms of its appeal to others. The Russian president understands that to win, you dont have to be better than everyone else; everyone else just has to do a little worse. And this is why the Kremlin has launched a strategy of political warfare against the West in the form of disinformation campaigns, support for far-right political parties in Europe, cyberattacks, money laundering, and other tools of influence that allow Moscow to undermine its perceived adversaries at very little cost. After all, its cheaper to open an internet troll farm than to build tanks and invest in sustainable economic growth. And if the Russians can cause so much damage with so little, others who see the United States as an enemy are sure to follow suit. Alina Polyakova is a fellow at the Brookings Institution and an adjunct professor of European studies at the Paul H. Nitze School of Advanced International Studies at Johns Hopkins University. | Julian Zelizer: U.S. and Russia are in a new Cold War, but the Cold War didn't end in the Soviet Unions favor. He says the two countries' relations have deteriorated in recent years. | ctrlsum | 1 | https://www.sfchronicle.com/opinion/openforum/article/Are-the-U-S-and-Russia-in-a-new-Cold-War-13546860.php | 0.471369 |
Are the U.S. and Russia in a new Cold War? | The revelation of Russian interference in the 2016 presidential elections caught Americans by surprise. As we learn more about how the Russian intelligence agencies, state-controlled media and various proxies worked to influence the U.S. elections in an effort to undermine trust in the electoral process and further divide Americans, many are asking if the United States and Russia are in a new Cold War. But, as we know, the Cold War didnt end in the Soviet Unions favor. During the Cold War, the world seemed more neatly divided into a competition between two superpowers. Americans were taught that the Communists were the bad guys (and Soviet citizens were taught about the evils and hypocrisy of the West). After the fall of the Soviet Union in 1991, however, the United States reigned as the sole superpower. Without the evil empire to oppose, successive U.S. administrations vacillated on the level of focus on Russia and in offering a strategic vision for the newly liberated post-Soviet republics. Each president seemed convinced that he could fix the Russia problem through a close personal relationship with the Russian leader. President Bill Clinton developed a close bond with Boris Yeltsin, and sought to integrate Russia into international institutions, such as the G-8, while at the same time pursuing policies that Yeltsin categorically opposed, most notably the U.S.-led bombing of Serbia. After Yeltsins handpicked successor, Vladimir Putin, took the reins in the Kremlin, President George W. Bush infamously said that he looked into Putins eyes and saw his soul (a comment he would later come to regret). Putin invaded Georgia at the end of Bushs term. Yet, just a year later in 2009, with Putin briefly handing over the presidency to Dmitry Medvedev (but undoubtedly remaining as the decision-maker), the Obama administration was ready for a fresh start. The Obama reset soured quickly however when Putin returned to the presidency in 2012, intent to redefine the relationship with the West as an adversarial one. Relations between Russia and the West took a nosedive in 2014. As Ukrainians rose up in a mass democratic movement to depose a corrupt, Kremlin-controlled leader, Viktor Yanukovich, the Kremlin seized the opportunity to invade Ukraine, taking over Ukraines Crimean peninsula and starting a proxy war in Ukraines east. The United States and Europe responded by imposing economic sanctions on Russia and providing financial and military support to help the Ukrainians defend themselves against further Russian aggression. Similarly, President Trump came into office seeking closer and better relations with Russia. Despite those stated intentions, U.S.-Russia relations have continued to unravel: Congress forced his administration to impose more sanctions on Russian businesses and oligarchs; the U.S. expelled 60 Russian diplomats in response to the attempt by Russian agents to poison a former Russian intelligence officer in the U.K.; and, the White House has pulled out of a Soviet-era arms-control treaty citing rampant Russian violations. that the American people are more confused about U.S.-Russia relations than during the Cold War years. Putin skillfully plays with this ambiguity: He has carefully crafted an image that often contradicts reality. In this image, he plays the roles simultaneously of defender of Christian values (even though the majority of Russians are not religious); savior of Russia from economic destitution (even though under his rule the Russian economy entered a period of stagnation and 25 percent of Russians are too poor to have an indoor toilet); and a strong leader as compared with the weak democratically elected leaders in the West (even though most Westerners who visit Russia outside the glitz of Moscow would likely not want to live there). If it wasnt clear before, it should be clear by now: Putins Russia is an adversary of the United States. The Kremlin needs to have an external enemy to distract the Russian people from the problems plaguing their country. Putin, however, is no fool he understands the limits of Russian capacities and ability to project power. Russia is no match to the United States economically, militarily, or in terms of its appeal to others. The Russian president understands that to win, you dont have to be better than everyone else; everyone else just has to do a little worse. And this is why the Kremlin has launched a strategy of political warfare against the West in the form of disinformation campaigns, support for far-right political parties in Europe, cyberattacks, money laundering, and other tools of influence that allow Moscow to undermine its perceived adversaries at very little cost. After all, its cheaper to open an internet troll farm than to build tanks and invest in sustainable economic growth. And if the Russians can cause so much damage with so little, others who see the United States as an enemy are sure to follow suit. Alina Polyakova is a fellow at the Brookings Institution and an adjunct professor of European studies at the Paul H. Nitze School of Advanced International Studies at Johns Hopkins University. | Many are asking if the United States and Russia are in a new Cold War. During the Cold War, the world seemed more neatly divided into a competition between two superpowers. After the fall of the Soviet Union in 1991, the United States reigned as the sole superpower. | pegasus | 2 | https://www.sfchronicle.com/opinion/openforum/article/Are-the-U-S-and-Russia-in-a-new-Cold-War-13546860.php | 0.102149 |
Can the Saints limit Rams star Aaron Donald as well as they did in Week 9? | Whether it takes one, two or three players to block Aaron Donald, the New Orleans Saints have to do whatever it takes to keep the Los Angeles Rams All-Pro defensive tackle away from quarterback Drew Brees, left tackle Terron Armstead said. The Saints did well to limit Donalds impact when these teams played in Week 9, but he had one tackle for loss, a pass defensed and a fumble recovery. Donald also finished with four quarterback hits, three of which helped produce incomplete passes. Still, the Saints held Donald without a sack, and that could be a harbinger for success against the Rams defense. Los Angeles is 18-0 the past two seasons when Donald has at least one sack, compared to 5-7 in games when he doesnt produce a sack. One of those losses came in Week 9 when the Saints beat the Rams, 45-35. We just worked well together, Saints right guard Larry Warford said. He was still a problem, for sure. Hes the best D-tackle in the league, hands down. We had a great plan, and we just trusted each other, trusted the plan, worked well together and definitely limited that pass rush. Because they have one of the best pass rushes in the league, you have to take care of that to win a game against them. Saints will rout the Rams and reach the Super Bowl. Here are 5 reasons why. Blocking Donald could be tougher this time as the Saints offensive line has not been playing as well as it did in the first 10 games of the season. In the divisional round, the Saints struggled at times to block the Eagles defensive line, particularly the interior duo of Fletcher Cox and Haloti Ngata. Saints left guard Andrus Peat, in particular, had a rough game, but hell be another week removed from his hand surgery, which could help him return to form. The Saints gave up two sacks last Sunday against the Eagles, but they didnt allow any in the second half. During the regular season, the Saints allowed 18 sacks, second fewest in the NFL. Going against Donald and Ndamukong Suh, however, is a tougher challenge than most matchups. Its hard to say youre going to keep him in check, Saints coach Sean Payton said of Donald. Hes played as well at that three-technique position as weve seen in years. Hes the best defensive player today in football (with) his numbers, his production. It shows up in the run game, it shows up in the passing game, and its a challenge. 'Fuel to the fire': Visit the Los Angeles high school where Michael Thomas found his edge Donald finished 2018 as the league leader with 20.5 sacks and 25 tackles for loss, and his ability to slow the run game is something the Saints need to protect against, too. Saints fullback Zach Line said he typically runs through holes cleanly because of the prowess of the offensive line, but he knows Donald is savvy enough to set up his moves to pounce when least expected, which might make it important for Line or other non-linemen to chip him whenever possible. Warford said Donald is so good that he usually has a plan while also knowing the offensive lines plan, which helps him be even more disruptive. Hes a guy you have to know where hes at at all times, Saints backup offensive tackle Jermon Bushrod said. You dont get 20.5 sacks on accident. He has to have hands on him at all times, and when things arent done the way that we need to, he can cause problems. The Saints hope to have similar success blocking Donald as they did in Week 9, but everyone on the team knows thats easier said than done. Were not going out to try to necessarily replicate what we did, Armstead said. Its a different game. Im sure hell have his own plan in place. We just have to execute ours. At the end of the day, its not one-on-one. Its 11-on-11, our whole offense versus their whole defense. We just have to go out and execute each man doing their job, so we can come out with the win. | The Saints held Rams defensive tackle Aaron Donald without a sack in Week 9. | pegasus | 0 | https://www.nola.com/saints/2019/01/can-the-saints-limit-rams-star-aaron-donald-as-well-as-they-did-in-week-9.html | 0.250301 |
Can the Saints limit Rams star Aaron Donald as well as they did in Week 9? | Whether it takes one, two or three players to block Aaron Donald, the New Orleans Saints have to do whatever it takes to keep the Los Angeles Rams All-Pro defensive tackle away from quarterback Drew Brees, left tackle Terron Armstead said. The Saints did well to limit Donalds impact when these teams played in Week 9, but he had one tackle for loss, a pass defensed and a fumble recovery. Donald also finished with four quarterback hits, three of which helped produce incomplete passes. Still, the Saints held Donald without a sack, and that could be a harbinger for success against the Rams defense. Los Angeles is 18-0 the past two seasons when Donald has at least one sack, compared to 5-7 in games when he doesnt produce a sack. One of those losses came in Week 9 when the Saints beat the Rams, 45-35. We just worked well together, Saints right guard Larry Warford said. He was still a problem, for sure. Hes the best D-tackle in the league, hands down. We had a great plan, and we just trusted each other, trusted the plan, worked well together and definitely limited that pass rush. Because they have one of the best pass rushes in the league, you have to take care of that to win a game against them. Saints will rout the Rams and reach the Super Bowl. Here are 5 reasons why. Blocking Donald could be tougher this time as the Saints offensive line has not been playing as well as it did in the first 10 games of the season. In the divisional round, the Saints struggled at times to block the Eagles defensive line, particularly the interior duo of Fletcher Cox and Haloti Ngata. Saints left guard Andrus Peat, in particular, had a rough game, but hell be another week removed from his hand surgery, which could help him return to form. The Saints gave up two sacks last Sunday against the Eagles, but they didnt allow any in the second half. During the regular season, the Saints allowed 18 sacks, second fewest in the NFL. Going against Donald and Ndamukong Suh, however, is a tougher challenge than most matchups. Its hard to say youre going to keep him in check, Saints coach Sean Payton said of Donald. Hes played as well at that three-technique position as weve seen in years. Hes the best defensive player today in football (with) his numbers, his production. It shows up in the run game, it shows up in the passing game, and its a challenge. 'Fuel to the fire': Visit the Los Angeles high school where Michael Thomas found his edge Donald finished 2018 as the league leader with 20.5 sacks and 25 tackles for loss, and his ability to slow the run game is something the Saints need to protect against, too. Saints fullback Zach Line said he typically runs through holes cleanly because of the prowess of the offensive line, but he knows Donald is savvy enough to set up his moves to pounce when least expected, which might make it important for Line or other non-linemen to chip him whenever possible. Warford said Donald is so good that he usually has a plan while also knowing the offensive lines plan, which helps him be even more disruptive. Hes a guy you have to know where hes at at all times, Saints backup offensive tackle Jermon Bushrod said. You dont get 20.5 sacks on accident. He has to have hands on him at all times, and when things arent done the way that we need to, he can cause problems. The Saints hope to have similar success blocking Donald as they did in Week 9, but everyone on the team knows thats easier said than done. Were not going out to try to necessarily replicate what we did, Armstead said. Its a different game. Im sure hell have his own plan in place. We just have to execute ours. At the end of the day, its not one-on-one. Its 11-on-11, our whole offense versus their whole defense. We just have to go out and execute each man doing their job, so we can come out with the win. | The Saints did well to limit Aaron Donald's impact when they played in Week 9. The Saints held Donald without a sack, and that could be a harbinger for success against the Rams defense. | ctrlsum | 1 | https://www.nola.com/saints/2019/01/can-the-saints-limit-rams-star-aaron-donald-as-well-as-they-did-in-week-9.html | 0.463619 |
Can the Saints limit Rams star Aaron Donald as well as they did in Week 9? | Whether it takes one, two or three players to block Aaron Donald, the New Orleans Saints have to do whatever it takes to keep the Los Angeles Rams All-Pro defensive tackle away from quarterback Drew Brees, left tackle Terron Armstead said. The Saints did well to limit Donalds impact when these teams played in Week 9, but he had one tackle for loss, a pass defensed and a fumble recovery. Donald also finished with four quarterback hits, three of which helped produce incomplete passes. Still, the Saints held Donald without a sack, and that could be a harbinger for success against the Rams defense. Los Angeles is 18-0 the past two seasons when Donald has at least one sack, compared to 5-7 in games when he doesnt produce a sack. One of those losses came in Week 9 when the Saints beat the Rams, 45-35. We just worked well together, Saints right guard Larry Warford said. He was still a problem, for sure. Hes the best D-tackle in the league, hands down. We had a great plan, and we just trusted each other, trusted the plan, worked well together and definitely limited that pass rush. Because they have one of the best pass rushes in the league, you have to take care of that to win a game against them. Saints will rout the Rams and reach the Super Bowl. Here are 5 reasons why. Blocking Donald could be tougher this time as the Saints offensive line has not been playing as well as it did in the first 10 games of the season. In the divisional round, the Saints struggled at times to block the Eagles defensive line, particularly the interior duo of Fletcher Cox and Haloti Ngata. Saints left guard Andrus Peat, in particular, had a rough game, but hell be another week removed from his hand surgery, which could help him return to form. The Saints gave up two sacks last Sunday against the Eagles, but they didnt allow any in the second half. During the regular season, the Saints allowed 18 sacks, second fewest in the NFL. Going against Donald and Ndamukong Suh, however, is a tougher challenge than most matchups. Its hard to say youre going to keep him in check, Saints coach Sean Payton said of Donald. Hes played as well at that three-technique position as weve seen in years. Hes the best defensive player today in football (with) his numbers, his production. It shows up in the run game, it shows up in the passing game, and its a challenge. 'Fuel to the fire': Visit the Los Angeles high school where Michael Thomas found his edge Donald finished 2018 as the league leader with 20.5 sacks and 25 tackles for loss, and his ability to slow the run game is something the Saints need to protect against, too. Saints fullback Zach Line said he typically runs through holes cleanly because of the prowess of the offensive line, but he knows Donald is savvy enough to set up his moves to pounce when least expected, which might make it important for Line or other non-linemen to chip him whenever possible. Warford said Donald is so good that he usually has a plan while also knowing the offensive lines plan, which helps him be even more disruptive. Hes a guy you have to know where hes at at all times, Saints backup offensive tackle Jermon Bushrod said. You dont get 20.5 sacks on accident. He has to have hands on him at all times, and when things arent done the way that we need to, he can cause problems. The Saints hope to have similar success blocking Donald as they did in Week 9, but everyone on the team knows thats easier said than done. Were not going out to try to necessarily replicate what we did, Armstead said. Its a different game. Im sure hell have his own plan in place. We just have to execute ours. At the end of the day, its not one-on-one. Its 11-on-11, our whole offense versus their whole defense. We just have to go out and execute each man doing their job, so we can come out with the win. | The Saints did well to limit Aaron Donald's impact when they played in Week 9. The Saints offensive line has not been playing as well as it did in the first 10 games of the season. The Rams are 18-0 the past two seasons when Donald has at least one sack. | ctrlsum | 2 | https://www.nola.com/saints/2019/01/can-the-saints-limit-rams-star-aaron-donald-as-well-as-they-did-in-week-9.html | 0.479084 |
Will My Retirement Fund Withdrawals Affect My Social Security Benefits? | Social Security is a government-created program designed to provide a source of continuous income to retirees, but what most people don't know is that if you earn more than a certain amount, the government will take some of that money back in the form of a benefit tax. This means retirees need to be strategic about how much they withdraw from their retirement accounts so that they don't accidentally cost themselves money. Below, I'll explain how your retirement fund withdrawals could affect your Social Security benefits and what you can do about it. How your income affects your Social Security benefits If your "combined income" -- a Social Security Administration figure that I'll explain below -- is above a certain threshold, then up to 85% of your Social Security benefits could be taxed as income. The combined-income threshold varies by marital status. Beneficiaries with a combined income over $25,000 and married couples filing jointly with a combined income of more than $32,000 could be taxed on up to 50% of their benefits. Individuals with a combined income over $34,000 and couples with a combined income over $44,000 could be taxed on up to 85% of their benefits. Mature couple evaluating finances More Image source: Getty Images. Your combined income is calculated based on three figures: your adjusted gross income, any nontaxable interest you've earned and half of your Social Security benefits. Your adjusted gross income is the total amount of taxable income you earn in a year, minus certain adjustments, such as half of any self-employment taxes, alimony payments, or contributions to retirement accounts. Your AGI does include withdrawals from traditional retirement accounts -- including traditional 401(k)s and IRAs -- but it doesn't include withdrawals from Roth accounts, because contributions to these accounts are taxed up front. You may have nontaxable interest if you have tax-exempt bond funds in your investment portfolio. Once you have this information, you just add up the numbers to figure out your combined income. So if you withdraw $25,000 from your traditional retirement accounts, you have $2,000 in nontaxable interest, and you're getting $12,000 per year from Social Security, your combined income would be $33,000: $25,000 + $2,000 + 1/2($12,000) = $33,000 Remember that if your combined income exceeds one of the taxation thresholds above, that doesn't mean you'll be taxed on the full amount. There's a special formula that determines how much tax you'll actually pay on your benefits. This can be complicated to figure out on your own, but fortunately there are Social Security tax calculators that can do the work for you. How to avoid being taxed on your Social Security benefits The simplest way to avoid Social Security benefit taxation is to be mindful of how much you're withdrawing from your retirement accounts each year. If you're close to one of the taxation thresholds, you could try to withdraw a little less than you planned to avoid the tax. But if you regularly find yourself bumping up against the limit, you may have to make some adjustments. It's typically best to delay distributions from your Roth IRA as long as possible so that it can continue to grow tax-free, but there are times when you may want to tap it sooner. If you're close to the Social Security taxation thresholds listed above, consider taking more money from Roth accounts and less from traditional accounts. This could lower your combined income enough to avoid Social Security benefit taxes while still providing enough income to cover your living expenses. And if you're not yet retired, consider investing through a Roth-type account -- or even rolling over some existing savings from a traditional account to a Roth account -- to help you manage your taxes in retirement. Even if you cannot avoid paying taxes on some of your Social Security benefits, it still pays to understand how this works. You may be able to reduce your tax burden, and at the very least, you won't get a nasty surprise come tax time. More From The Motley Fool The Motley Fool has a disclosure policy. | Social Security is a government-created program designed to provide a source of continuous income to retirees. If you earn more than a certain amount, the government will take some of that money back in the form of a benefit tax. This means retirees need to be strategic about how much they withdraw from their retirement accounts so that they don't accidentally cost themselves money. | bart | 2 | https://news.yahoo.com/retirement-fund-withdrawals-affect-social-230500996.html | 0.241809 |
How did Jake Patterson's life lead to Jayme Closs? | One question plays endlessly in the minds of people here along the rural roads deep in the North Woods. He was an ordinary, well-behaved kid, people here say. Teachers and classmates at his small country school described him as smart and quick-witted quiet, but not a loner. He had friends and was well-accepted among the 34 members of the Class of 2015 at Northwood School, most of whom had been together since kindergarten. He played video games, board games Risk was a favorite and devoured Tom Clancy spy novels. A friend said Jake T. Patterson, pictured here in a yearbook, never said anything about girls during his middle and high school years. Whatever the answer, it lies along the stretch of Hwy. 53 that runs roughly 100 miles from Barron, Wis., to the shores of Lake Superior. Its here that the 21-year-old Patterson spent most of his days, living in a series of small towns dotting the highway before settling in at his fathers remote cabin 9 miles east of Gordon. And its there, he told police, where he kept Jayme Closs imprisoned after fatally shooting her parents with a 12-gauge shotgun in their home just outside Barron back in October. Something just got stuck in his head, said James Moyer, Pattersons maternal grandfather. I cant imagine anybody thinking about this, let alone doing it. Living off the radar An hour north of the Closs home, the tiny town of Gordon, with a population of 645 residents, was not on our radar, Barron County Sheriff Chris Fitzgerald said in the hours after Jayme escaped Jan. 10 and Patterson was arrested. And if you want to stay off the radar, northwestern Wisconsin is a good place to be. A maze of two-lane rural roads, closely lined with tall pines, reaches deep into the wilderness off Hwy. 53. Homes and cabins are spaced far apart, often set back and hidden in the woods. People mind their own business here, community ties grow slowly. In Haugen, a village of about 270 residents some 45 miles south of Gordon and home to Pattersons mother, Deborah Frey, few noticed Jake when he visited. Its a very close-knit town, said one resident. If you havent been here three generations, people dont really know you. Frey, who drives a school bus for the nearby Rice Lake district, has lived in town only a short time, but locals know who she is by the bus thats sometimes parked in front of her home. Shes friendly. Shed wave when she went by, said Jim Hill, owner of the Village Grocery. Hill said last week that he didnt see Jake often, but remembers him stopping in the store occasionally for cigarettes. Marlboros, Hill said. Frey and Jakes father, Patrick Patterson, had a troubled marriage and divorced when Jake, the youngest of three children, was 11. Court records show that they filed for divorce in 2005, reconciled, then ended their marriage in 2008 after 19 years. The divorce decree provided scant details other than outlining the financial arrangements and joint child custody. Both parents were required to take a class titled Effects of Divorce on Children. Moyer said the divorce bothered Jake, like it would any kid. But hes not sure of the lasting impact. Jayme Closs. (FBI/TNS) ORG XMIT: 1246483 As Frey moved from one local town to another over the years, Jake began spending more time at his fathers home in Gordon, according to Victoria Fisher, whose son Dylan was a close friend of Jakes through middle school and high school. Dylan Fisher, who lives in nearby Minong, said he often went to the Patterson house to play Risk and other board games. His dad, brother and sister were at the house when I was there, Fisher said last week. Marine Corps washout Fisher said to his knowledge, Patterson never dated. In fact, he never discussed the topic. He never said anything [about girls], Fisher said. It never seemed to be a pressing concern. In his high school yearbook, Patterson said his plan after graduation was Marine Corps infantry. His senior quote: Im finally done with school. Three months after graduating, Patterson headed for the Marine Corps Recruit Depot in San Diego. But he returned to Gordon after five weeks, a washout as a Marine Corps private. The character of his service was incongruent with Marine Corps expectations and standards, the Corps said in a statement last week. This is the home where Jake Patterson lived and from where Jayme Closs told police she escaped after being held captive for 88 days. It was a bitter experience, Pattersons grandfather said. It was profoundly disappointing when he didnt make it in the Marines, Moyer said. He had health issues. He wasnt able to hold up to the regimen. Asked what the health issues were, Moyer replied, It was internal. Once back home, Patterson distanced himself from his high school friends. Fisher said he tried several times to reach him in the months after graduation but never got a response. I havent talked to him in three years, Fisher said. Other classmates also were rebuffed. I wish I had known he was around, Fisher said. I wish I could have done something. He was a normal person. He had a sense of whats right and wrong. He was a good person. He laughed, he smiled, he cried. He wasnt an empty person. Mother is petrified Since her sons arrest more than a week ago, Frey hasnt left her home in Haugen, said Michael Bednar, who lives across the street. Shes petrified, said Bednar, adding that hes never seen or talked to Jake Patterson. Bednars wife, Susan, who has been walking Freys black Lab, said the mother feels terrible. She never saw any signs of violence. She feels bad that she didnt see it. Patrick Patterson apparently didnt see anything either although according to the criminal complaint filed in the case, he typically visited his son on Saturdays during the time Jayme was held captive at the house. Frey and her ex-husband have repeatedly declined media interviews. As Patrick Patterson stopped at the Barron County courthouse one morning last week, he told a CNN reporter, All I care about right now is Jaymes family. Fisher and others, meanwhile, say they have no idea how Jake got by. I dont know that he was even working, Moyer said. I think he was looking for work. He wasnt a real assertive person. He didnt have the drive to push those opportunities very hard. Several years ago, Patterson worked for one day at the Jennie-O Turkey Store in Barron, where Jaymes parents, Denise and James Closs, worked for years. Earlier last fall, he worked for two days at a cheese factory outside Almena, a small town about 8 miles west of Barron. It was on the way to that job one morning, he told police, that he spotted Jayme boarding a school bus, which set in motion his plan to kidnap the girl hed never seen before. And on the day that Jayme escaped from his house after 88 days in captivity, Patterson submitted a rsum and an online job application to a liquor wholesaler in Superior. On it, he described himself as an honest and hardworking guy. Not much work experience but I show up to work and am a quick learner. Not ordinary sad The carved wooden sign over the door of Pattersons house in Gordon reads Pattersons Retreat. In the driveway are six old and snow-covered vehicles that look as if they havent been driven in a long time. A battered snowmobile sits in the yard, along with the usual odds and ends that accumulate at a rural residence shovels, rakes, tools. Bits of rope and stacks of lumber. Theres a red, barn-shaped bird feeder hanging from a birch tree and a trampoline out back. The two-story home is worn, with peeling paint and a rusty security door with a broken lock. A wooden deck is strung with Christmas lights, a welcome mat is placed by the front door. Its here, Jake Patterson told police, where that he kept Jayme prisoner beneath a twin bed. And its here where the quiet life he once knew came to an end. Its profoundly sad. Its not ordinary sad, Moyer said softly. We lost our grandson, too. Its like a death. Said Fisher, Pattersons best friend: Ive been trying to figure it out, and I cant. Staff writers Brandon Stahl and Pam Louwagie contributed to this report. | Jake T. Patterson lived in a series of small towns before settling in at his father's remote cabin. It's there, he told police, that he kept Jayme Closs imprisoned after fatally shooting her parents. | ctrlsum | 1 | http://www.startribune.com/how-did-jake-patterson-s-life-lead-to-jayme-closs/504601191/ | 0.337232 |
How did Jake Patterson's life lead to Jayme Closs? | One question plays endlessly in the minds of people here along the rural roads deep in the North Woods. He was an ordinary, well-behaved kid, people here say. Teachers and classmates at his small country school described him as smart and quick-witted quiet, but not a loner. He had friends and was well-accepted among the 34 members of the Class of 2015 at Northwood School, most of whom had been together since kindergarten. He played video games, board games Risk was a favorite and devoured Tom Clancy spy novels. A friend said Jake T. Patterson, pictured here in a yearbook, never said anything about girls during his middle and high school years. Whatever the answer, it lies along the stretch of Hwy. 53 that runs roughly 100 miles from Barron, Wis., to the shores of Lake Superior. Its here that the 21-year-old Patterson spent most of his days, living in a series of small towns dotting the highway before settling in at his fathers remote cabin 9 miles east of Gordon. And its there, he told police, where he kept Jayme Closs imprisoned after fatally shooting her parents with a 12-gauge shotgun in their home just outside Barron back in October. Something just got stuck in his head, said James Moyer, Pattersons maternal grandfather. I cant imagine anybody thinking about this, let alone doing it. Living off the radar An hour north of the Closs home, the tiny town of Gordon, with a population of 645 residents, was not on our radar, Barron County Sheriff Chris Fitzgerald said in the hours after Jayme escaped Jan. 10 and Patterson was arrested. And if you want to stay off the radar, northwestern Wisconsin is a good place to be. A maze of two-lane rural roads, closely lined with tall pines, reaches deep into the wilderness off Hwy. 53. Homes and cabins are spaced far apart, often set back and hidden in the woods. People mind their own business here, community ties grow slowly. In Haugen, a village of about 270 residents some 45 miles south of Gordon and home to Pattersons mother, Deborah Frey, few noticed Jake when he visited. Its a very close-knit town, said one resident. If you havent been here three generations, people dont really know you. Frey, who drives a school bus for the nearby Rice Lake district, has lived in town only a short time, but locals know who she is by the bus thats sometimes parked in front of her home. Shes friendly. Shed wave when she went by, said Jim Hill, owner of the Village Grocery. Hill said last week that he didnt see Jake often, but remembers him stopping in the store occasionally for cigarettes. Marlboros, Hill said. Frey and Jakes father, Patrick Patterson, had a troubled marriage and divorced when Jake, the youngest of three children, was 11. Court records show that they filed for divorce in 2005, reconciled, then ended their marriage in 2008 after 19 years. The divorce decree provided scant details other than outlining the financial arrangements and joint child custody. Both parents were required to take a class titled Effects of Divorce on Children. Moyer said the divorce bothered Jake, like it would any kid. But hes not sure of the lasting impact. Jayme Closs. (FBI/TNS) ORG XMIT: 1246483 As Frey moved from one local town to another over the years, Jake began spending more time at his fathers home in Gordon, according to Victoria Fisher, whose son Dylan was a close friend of Jakes through middle school and high school. Dylan Fisher, who lives in nearby Minong, said he often went to the Patterson house to play Risk and other board games. His dad, brother and sister were at the house when I was there, Fisher said last week. Marine Corps washout Fisher said to his knowledge, Patterson never dated. In fact, he never discussed the topic. He never said anything [about girls], Fisher said. It never seemed to be a pressing concern. In his high school yearbook, Patterson said his plan after graduation was Marine Corps infantry. His senior quote: Im finally done with school. Three months after graduating, Patterson headed for the Marine Corps Recruit Depot in San Diego. But he returned to Gordon after five weeks, a washout as a Marine Corps private. The character of his service was incongruent with Marine Corps expectations and standards, the Corps said in a statement last week. This is the home where Jake Patterson lived and from where Jayme Closs told police she escaped after being held captive for 88 days. It was a bitter experience, Pattersons grandfather said. It was profoundly disappointing when he didnt make it in the Marines, Moyer said. He had health issues. He wasnt able to hold up to the regimen. Asked what the health issues were, Moyer replied, It was internal. Once back home, Patterson distanced himself from his high school friends. Fisher said he tried several times to reach him in the months after graduation but never got a response. I havent talked to him in three years, Fisher said. Other classmates also were rebuffed. I wish I had known he was around, Fisher said. I wish I could have done something. He was a normal person. He had a sense of whats right and wrong. He was a good person. He laughed, he smiled, he cried. He wasnt an empty person. Mother is petrified Since her sons arrest more than a week ago, Frey hasnt left her home in Haugen, said Michael Bednar, who lives across the street. Shes petrified, said Bednar, adding that hes never seen or talked to Jake Patterson. Bednars wife, Susan, who has been walking Freys black Lab, said the mother feels terrible. She never saw any signs of violence. She feels bad that she didnt see it. Patrick Patterson apparently didnt see anything either although according to the criminal complaint filed in the case, he typically visited his son on Saturdays during the time Jayme was held captive at the house. Frey and her ex-husband have repeatedly declined media interviews. As Patrick Patterson stopped at the Barron County courthouse one morning last week, he told a CNN reporter, All I care about right now is Jaymes family. Fisher and others, meanwhile, say they have no idea how Jake got by. I dont know that he was even working, Moyer said. I think he was looking for work. He wasnt a real assertive person. He didnt have the drive to push those opportunities very hard. Several years ago, Patterson worked for one day at the Jennie-O Turkey Store in Barron, where Jaymes parents, Denise and James Closs, worked for years. Earlier last fall, he worked for two days at a cheese factory outside Almena, a small town about 8 miles west of Barron. It was on the way to that job one morning, he told police, that he spotted Jayme boarding a school bus, which set in motion his plan to kidnap the girl hed never seen before. And on the day that Jayme escaped from his house after 88 days in captivity, Patterson submitted a rsum and an online job application to a liquor wholesaler in Superior. On it, he described himself as an honest and hardworking guy. Not much work experience but I show up to work and am a quick learner. Not ordinary sad The carved wooden sign over the door of Pattersons house in Gordon reads Pattersons Retreat. In the driveway are six old and snow-covered vehicles that look as if they havent been driven in a long time. A battered snowmobile sits in the yard, along with the usual odds and ends that accumulate at a rural residence shovels, rakes, tools. Bits of rope and stacks of lumber. Theres a red, barn-shaped bird feeder hanging from a birch tree and a trampoline out back. The two-story home is worn, with peeling paint and a rusty security door with a broken lock. A wooden deck is strung with Christmas lights, a welcome mat is placed by the front door. Its here, Jake Patterson told police, where that he kept Jayme prisoner beneath a twin bed. And its here where the quiet life he once knew came to an end. Its profoundly sad. Its not ordinary sad, Moyer said softly. We lost our grandson, too. Its like a death. Said Fisher, Pattersons best friend: Ive been trying to figure it out, and I cant. Staff writers Brandon Stahl and Pam Louwagie contributed to this report. | Jake T. Patterson lived in a series of small towns before settling in at his father's remote cabin. It's there, he told police, that he kept Jayme Closs imprisoned after fatally shooting her parents. Patterson was an ordinary, well-behaved kid, people here say. | ctrlsum | 2 | http://www.startribune.com/how-did-jake-patterson-s-life-lead-to-jayme-closs/504601191/ | 0.342864 |
Does Facebook game help company mine data for facial recognition technology? | The #10YearChallenge gained widespread traction on social media this month. It calls for posting two photos of yourself side by side one from today and one from a decade ago to show how youve changed. People are participating mostly on Facebook and Instagram, which is owned by Facebook. Some made jokes, paid tribute to old hairstyles or drew attention to issues like global warming. Celebrities posted glamour shots that showed negligible changes from one decade to the next. (Singer Mariah Carey won this round. I dont get this 10-year challenge, she wrote in a tweet, along with two identical photos side by side. Time is not something I acknowledge.) But one post went viral without featuring any side-by-side photos at all. It was written by Kate ONeill, author of the book Tech Humanist: How You Can Make Technology Better for Business and Better for Humans. Me 10 years ago: probably would have played along with the profile picture aging meme going around on Facebook and Instagram, she wrote in a tweet last week. Me now: ponders how all this data could be mined to train facial recognition algorithms on age progression and age recognition. Her words hit a nerve. People responded with concerns about whether they were helping the tech giant get better at identifying people. ONeills post got more than 10,000 retweets and more than 20,000 likes. She expanded on her thoughts in a widely shared article in Wired. I wondered about why this particular thought, in this particular moment, generated so much traction, ONeill said Friday, adding that she was not trying to stoke any panic. Experts said the photos uploaded for the #10YearChallenge were drops in a very, very big bucket of data that Facebook has been collecting for years. Supporters of facial recognition technologies said they can be indispensable for catching criminals or finding missing people. But critics warned they can enable mass surveillance or have unintended effects. Lauren Rhue, an assistant professor of information systems and analytics at the Wake Forest School of Business, said the #10YearChallenge could conceivably provide a relatively clean data set for a company that wanted to work on age-progression technology. But she added that Facebook already has billions of photos, and people should be wary of any company being in possession of such a large trove of biometric data. The risk in giving up any type of biometric data to a company is that theres not enough transparency, not only about how the data is currently being used, but also the future uses for it, she said, pointing to another form of biometric data, DNA, used by law enforcement to track down suspects something many people might not have anticipated when they volunteered saliva to trace their ancestral roots. There are things we dont think of as being threats, Rhue said. And then five or 10 years from now, we realize that there is a threat, but the data has already been given. Like the rest of us, Facebook looked different 10 years ago. It reached 360 million active users in 2009; now, it has more than 2 billion. Facebook announced it was using facial recognition technology in 2010. When people upload photos of their friends, Facebook can use the technology to suggest the names of people in the picture. It can also alert users if they are in a photo posted by a friend. Facebook has responded to concerns about photos and privacy in the past. The company said it does not intend to help strangers identify you, and has repeatedly pointed out that users can disable face recognition in their settings. As for the 10-year challenge, Facebook said its just a fun trend. The 10-year challenge is a user-generated meme that started on its own, without our involvement, the company said on Twitter. | The #10YearChallenge calls for posting two photos of yourself side by side. Experts say the game could help a company mine data for facial recognition technology. | ctrlsum | 1 | http://www.startribune.com/does-facebook-game-help-company-mine-data-for-facial-recognition-technology/504603711/ | 0.245732 |
Does Facebook game help company mine data for facial recognition technology? | The #10YearChallenge gained widespread traction on social media this month. It calls for posting two photos of yourself side by side one from today and one from a decade ago to show how youve changed. People are participating mostly on Facebook and Instagram, which is owned by Facebook. Some made jokes, paid tribute to old hairstyles or drew attention to issues like global warming. Celebrities posted glamour shots that showed negligible changes from one decade to the next. (Singer Mariah Carey won this round. I dont get this 10-year challenge, she wrote in a tweet, along with two identical photos side by side. Time is not something I acknowledge.) But one post went viral without featuring any side-by-side photos at all. It was written by Kate ONeill, author of the book Tech Humanist: How You Can Make Technology Better for Business and Better for Humans. Me 10 years ago: probably would have played along with the profile picture aging meme going around on Facebook and Instagram, she wrote in a tweet last week. Me now: ponders how all this data could be mined to train facial recognition algorithms on age progression and age recognition. Her words hit a nerve. People responded with concerns about whether they were helping the tech giant get better at identifying people. ONeills post got more than 10,000 retweets and more than 20,000 likes. She expanded on her thoughts in a widely shared article in Wired. I wondered about why this particular thought, in this particular moment, generated so much traction, ONeill said Friday, adding that she was not trying to stoke any panic. Experts said the photos uploaded for the #10YearChallenge were drops in a very, very big bucket of data that Facebook has been collecting for years. Supporters of facial recognition technologies said they can be indispensable for catching criminals or finding missing people. But critics warned they can enable mass surveillance or have unintended effects. Lauren Rhue, an assistant professor of information systems and analytics at the Wake Forest School of Business, said the #10YearChallenge could conceivably provide a relatively clean data set for a company that wanted to work on age-progression technology. But she added that Facebook already has billions of photos, and people should be wary of any company being in possession of such a large trove of biometric data. The risk in giving up any type of biometric data to a company is that theres not enough transparency, not only about how the data is currently being used, but also the future uses for it, she said, pointing to another form of biometric data, DNA, used by law enforcement to track down suspects something many people might not have anticipated when they volunteered saliva to trace their ancestral roots. There are things we dont think of as being threats, Rhue said. And then five or 10 years from now, we realize that there is a threat, but the data has already been given. Like the rest of us, Facebook looked different 10 years ago. It reached 360 million active users in 2009; now, it has more than 2 billion. Facebook announced it was using facial recognition technology in 2010. When people upload photos of their friends, Facebook can use the technology to suggest the names of people in the picture. It can also alert users if they are in a photo posted by a friend. Facebook has responded to concerns about photos and privacy in the past. The company said it does not intend to help strangers identify you, and has repeatedly pointed out that users can disable face recognition in their settings. As for the 10-year challenge, Facebook said its just a fun trend. The 10-year challenge is a user-generated meme that started on its own, without our involvement, the company said on Twitter. | The #10YearChallenge calls for posting two photos of yourself side by side. Experts say the photos are drops in a very, very big bucket of data that Facebook has been collecting for years. The game could help the company mine data for facial recognition technology, experts say. | ctrlsum | 2 | http://www.startribune.com/does-facebook-game-help-company-mine-data-for-facial-recognition-technology/504603711/ | 0.20557 |
What Is a Safe Withdrawal Rate in Retirement? | Retirement is a relatively new idea. In 1880, four-fifths of men over 65 were still working. The world we live in today is very different. The life expectancy of 65-and-up Americans has risen by several years, yet their labor force participation rate is under 25%. We rely on other sources of income to provide for us in our latter years. Because of all this, we need to think carefully about how much money we pull from our savings each year in retirement. Enter the "safe withdrawal rate" -- the percentage of your savings that you can, in theory, withdraw every year without running out of money while you're alive. Let's go over how to figure out what your safe withdrawal rate may be and how this number can help you plan your retirement. Image source: Getty Images. The idea behind a safe withdrawal rate is simple: It tells you how much money you can pull from your savings in year one of retirement. After that, you can adjust that rate every year to account for inflation. As we get into the nitty gritty of figuring out your safe withdrawal rate, keep in mind that there's no universally appropriate rate. Everyone's life and financial circumstances are unique. Having said that, the most popular rule of thumb is the 4% rule. This means that if you have a nest egg of $600,000, you should take out $24,000 in your first year (4% of $600,000), and then increase that amount in year two based on inflation. This is a key distinction: You do not take out 4% of your nest egg every year. You only do so in the first year, and then you make cost-of-living adjustments every year after that based on the rate of inflation. You can find recent inflation rates on websites such as USInflationCalculator.com, which shows you in a chart what the inflation rate has been for each of the past 10 years. If, for instance, inflation after year one stood at 3%, then it would be "safe" to withdraw $24,720 in year two ($24,000 X 1.03). That extra $720 would help make up for the rise in the prices of everyday goods like food and gasoline. You may think $24,000 isn't much to live on. But as we'll cover below, your nest egg is just one of (hopefully) many sources of income you can draw on in retirement. The 4% rule has an interesting origin story. For a long time, financial advisors believed it safe to withdraw up to 5% of your retirement portfolio in year one of retirement and make the same adjustments. But in 1994, financial advisor William Bengen released a landmark paper that shifted the debate markedly. According to his research, 4% should be the new standard-bearer. Bengen ran models showing how different portfolios, made up of varying blends of stocks and bonds, would have performed in the past. The two variables he looked for were 1) the initial withdrawal rate and 2) the mix between stocks and bonds. His calculations included the biggest market downturns, such as the Great Depression and the bear market of the early 1970s. Using the 4% rule, Bengen claimed, would help retirees avoid insolvency: Assuming a minimum requirement of 30 years of portfolio longevity, a first-year withdrawal of 4 percent, followed by inflation-adjusted withdrawals in subsequent years, should be safe. In no past case has it caused a portfolio to be exhausted before 33 years, and in most cases it will lead to portfolio lives of 50 years or longer. In other words, it's highly likely -- based on past data -- that the 4% rule will allow your nest egg to last at least 30 years (until your 90s) and perhaps 50 years or more. That's great news for those who plan to live to 120! Just as important, Bengen found that keeping between 50% to 75% of your nest egg in stocks was important. While stocks are more volatile in the short term, they provide higher returns than bonds in the long run. Because retirement can last anywhere from one to 40 years, long-term results matter. It's vitally important to understand the parameters of Bengen's research. Here are some key assumptions the 4% rule makes: Between 50% and 75% of your nest egg is invested in stocks, perhaps via low-fee exchange-traded funds. The remaining portion -- between 25% and 50% -- is invested in intermediate-term Treasury notes or some other sort of bond. Every year, these allocations are rebalanced to maintain your "ideal" allocation. Perhaps the most important assumption is that you do not become overly conservative if there are stock market declines. Lowering your withdrawal rate when the market dives is perfectly acceptable, but selling out of stocks and buying more bonds after market downturns can be disastrous. As Bengen points out: The client who retired in 1929 with $500,000 in a retirement fund saw that fund dwindle to less than $200,000 by the end of 1932. ... In this situation, with stocks having performed so dismally so early in retirement, it may be tempting to switch all investments to bonds in order to salvage what is left of the original capital. But that would be precisely the wrong thing to do! He goes on to explain how such a client would be committing the cardinal investing sin: buying high and then selling low, thereby locking in tremendous losses. Bengen goes on to demonstrate how this approach would lead to said client running out of money in less than 20 years. Had they left their allocation alone, the nest egg would have recovered nicely and lasted the duration of retirement. That's because every time the stock market has experienced a significant downturn, it has eventually bounced back even stronger. After falling 57% during the Great Recession, the S&P 500 has since advanced over 280%! The real killer: sequence risk! By far the biggest risk that retirees face -- especially if they choose to withdraw more than 4% from their nest egg -- is a huge drop in stocks, bonds, or (gasp) both in the first five years of retirement. In general, you will likely be safe if you are following the 4% rule. But if there's a stock market drop of over 60% in the first five years of your retirement, you should consider reducing the amount you pull out. The reason for this is twofold: The portion of the nest egg you withdraw will increase markedly above the 4% threshold. For example, say you have a $1 million nest egg. In year one, you'd withdraw 4%, or $40,000. But if the market drops 60% over the following year while inflation is flat, then according to the 4% rule, you'll need to withdraw $40,000 from the remaining balance of $384,000 the next year -- that's 10.4% of your nest egg! All of the money taken out does not get the chance to compound over the next 25 to 35 years. In other words, the extra 6% that you withdrew in the example would lose the growth it might have otherwise experienced. Here's an even better example of what I'm talking about. In this scenario, three different portfolios each earn 6% returns after inflation during normal years but suffer a 25% decline for two consecutive years at varying stages of retirement. The colored lines represent your retirement savings after the corresponding number of years of retirement. Chart showing nest egg values over time with large drops at different points in retirement More Chart by author. Assumes 6% returns during 33 of 35 years and 25% declines during the remaining two years. In all three scenarios, these retirees experience 33 years of 6% returns and just two consecutive years in which their portfolios drop 25% (for reference, the market lost a little over 50% in the financial crisis of 2008 and 2009). But as you can see, the timing of those drops makes an enormous difference. Real-life returns are never this regular, but the point is clearly illustrated: One of the greatest risks to your portfolio is a huge drop in your nest egg's returns during the first five years of retirement. If that fall comes later, the danger is mitigated because your portfolio has had plenty of time to grow. The dent isn't nearly as harmful. From this, there are two clear takeaways: If you experience a huge loss in your portfolio in your first five years of retirement, strongly consider taking out less money until your portfolio recovers. Retiring after a particularly bad year or two in the stock market can actually be a good thing. The once-in-a-decade market drop -- a 30% drop, for instance, occurs every 10 years -- has already occurred, and the chances are higher that you'll experience better-than-expected gains moving forward. This assumes that the market swoon didn't deplete your nest egg to the point where you need to withdraw more than 4% in year one. As I pointed out above, if you endure a serious market swoon in the first couple of years of retirement, it would be wise to lower your withdrawals -- but not reduce your stock allocation -- until the market recovers. There are other factors that may tempt you to change your withdrawal rates over time. For instance, if you're lucky enough to retire at a time when returns are above normal, your nest egg may continue to grow at a fast clip, regardless of your withdrawals. That may tempt you to start withdrawing more. While a modest increase in your withdrawals is acceptable -- and occasionally necessary for expenses such as medical procedures -- Bengen again cautions against dramatic changes. [Such retirees] must understand that excess returns earned today will probably be needed to offset losses in the future. They have enjoyed good luck, and nothing more. Good luck is too rare and precious to be squandered. As Bengen shows, increasing your withdrawals by even a few percentage points -- say, from 4% to 7% -- could prove disastrous if low returns and high inflation are just around the corner. As promised, we can now get to the part that covers all of your sources of income in retirement. Looking at your safe withdrawal rate is nice, but it doesn't tell the whole story. If you have a $500,000 nest egg, you might balk at spending just $20,000 per year. Chances are, however, you'll have more sources of income than this. Apart from your your nest egg, these may include: Social Security benefits Pension payouts Annuities Rental property Part-time work In 2017, the average American household with residents over 65 spent about $50,000 annually. Because this is the "mean," and we know that high spenders can pull this figure up, let's assume the "median" -- a number that better represents ordinary retirees -- is somewhere around $42,000 per year. Our hypothetical couple has a nest egg of $250,000. That may sound like a lot, but using the 4% rule, this comes out to just $10,000 per year that can be safely withdrawn. Luckily, there are other sources to consider. For instance, the average monthly Social Security retirement benefit paid in November 2018 was $1,374. Over the course of a year, assuming there are two beneficiaries in the household, that amounts to $33,000. Add in a $10,000 savings withdrawal, and this couple would cross our $42,000-per-year threshold. Of course, not all couples will fit this scenario. Some will have income from rental properties, and others will have pensions. And while some people scoff at the idea of working part-time in retirement, there are a few big side benefits to such work: It helps you maintain social contacts in your community. This is vitally important, as loneliness is the silent killer of American retirees. It keeps you active in your old age, helping you maintain your health. It likely won't require major obligations. If you need an extra $10,000 per year, that means finding a job that pays $15 an hour and doing it for just 13 hours per week. You need to consider all of these moving pieces to determine what the appropriate withdrawal rate will be for you. Taxes: They're a central part of retirement planning calculations. And they are ever-changing. Back when Bengen did his original analysis, Roth IRAs didn't even exist yet. It would be foolish to assume there will be no major changes in the tax code between now and when you pass away. So we need to come to terms with the fact that taxes will affect our investments, and we can't predict exactly how. That said, here's what we do know when it comes to withdrawing money from our nest egg: Cash that is taken out of Roth IRAs and Roth 401(k)s will not be taxed. If you take out 4% in year one, you get to spend all 4%. Cash that is taken out of traditional IRAs, 401(k)s, or 403(b)s will be taxed based on your income bracket. That means you'll end up paying somewhere between 10% and 20% of whatever you pull out of these accounts in taxes. That's vitally important to remember, as it essentially lowers the amount of your savings you can actually spend in a given year from 4% to around 3.2%-3.6%. That's a big difference. There's an endless number of ways in which your tax situation can affect your safe withdrawal rate. There's no way we could cover every situation in one article. That's why its important for you to consult a tax professional and map out how much you'll pay in taxes and how you'll cover that expense. Drawbacks of taking too much Withdrawing too much money from your nest egg increases your chances of running out of money while you're still alive. This can put a financial strain not only on you, but also on your family and friends, who may feel obligated to step in and help fund the gap. If you do decide to start withdrawing more money than the 4% rule dictates, it's much better to raise your distributions by modest amounts, and after you've been retired for five to 10 years. Of course, major life events like unexpected illness can change the calculus -- but you can only focus on the factors that you control. And if you're really worried about running out of money, you might consider lowering your initial withdrawals to 3.5%. Drawbacks of taking too little Because we humans are risk-averse, the thought of running out of money gets a lot of attention. The flip side of the coin rarely gets noticed, but it's worth mentioning: If you withdraw too little, you run the risk of never enjoying retirement. I'll be the first to argue that, beyond fulfilling your basic needs, money doesn't buy all that much sustainable happiness. That being said, if you keep putting off retirement, working in a job you don't love so that your nest egg, your ideal retirement budget, and the 4% rule line up just right, you might have a problem. And if you spend retirement living like a monk solely because you fear going broke, you may someday pass on with a lot of leftover money -- and a lot of missed opportunities to enjoy yourself. Step back from the situation and look at it from 30,000 feet. Money need not be an end unto itself; it is a tool to help you get the experiences you want from life. Only three things can really make you happy, according to Martin Seligman and Sonja Lyubomirsky, two leaders in the field of positive psychology: Purpose and meaning Healthy relationships Control over your own time Those last two items require flexibility in your schedule. Because of this, taking out a slightly higher amount -- say 4.5% -- might be a worthwhile decision if it means it will give you more time to focus on such things. Retirement surveys prove conclusively that the elderly are the most content, least stressed age group in the nation. And not only that, the benefits that come with ending mandatory work are lasting! Everyone's circumstances will be different. Running out of money is obviously a fate we all want to avoid. By carefully considering all these factors -- especially the 4% rule -- combining them with where you and your spouse are right now, and planning out what you'd like your Golden Years to look like, you should get a better idea for exactly what your own safe withdrawal rates will look like. More From The Motley Fool The Motley Fool has a disclosure policy. | A safe withdrawal rate is the percentage of your savings that you can, in theory, withdraw every year without running out of money while you're alive. | ctrlsum | 0 | https://news.yahoo.com/safe-withdrawal-rate-retirement-010500468.html | 0.253752 |
What Is a Safe Withdrawal Rate in Retirement? | Retirement is a relatively new idea. In 1880, four-fifths of men over 65 were still working. The world we live in today is very different. The life expectancy of 65-and-up Americans has risen by several years, yet their labor force participation rate is under 25%. We rely on other sources of income to provide for us in our latter years. Because of all this, we need to think carefully about how much money we pull from our savings each year in retirement. Enter the "safe withdrawal rate" -- the percentage of your savings that you can, in theory, withdraw every year without running out of money while you're alive. Let's go over how to figure out what your safe withdrawal rate may be and how this number can help you plan your retirement. Image source: Getty Images. The idea behind a safe withdrawal rate is simple: It tells you how much money you can pull from your savings in year one of retirement. After that, you can adjust that rate every year to account for inflation. As we get into the nitty gritty of figuring out your safe withdrawal rate, keep in mind that there's no universally appropriate rate. Everyone's life and financial circumstances are unique. Having said that, the most popular rule of thumb is the 4% rule. This means that if you have a nest egg of $600,000, you should take out $24,000 in your first year (4% of $600,000), and then increase that amount in year two based on inflation. This is a key distinction: You do not take out 4% of your nest egg every year. You only do so in the first year, and then you make cost-of-living adjustments every year after that based on the rate of inflation. You can find recent inflation rates on websites such as USInflationCalculator.com, which shows you in a chart what the inflation rate has been for each of the past 10 years. If, for instance, inflation after year one stood at 3%, then it would be "safe" to withdraw $24,720 in year two ($24,000 X 1.03). That extra $720 would help make up for the rise in the prices of everyday goods like food and gasoline. You may think $24,000 isn't much to live on. But as we'll cover below, your nest egg is just one of (hopefully) many sources of income you can draw on in retirement. The 4% rule has an interesting origin story. For a long time, financial advisors believed it safe to withdraw up to 5% of your retirement portfolio in year one of retirement and make the same adjustments. But in 1994, financial advisor William Bengen released a landmark paper that shifted the debate markedly. According to his research, 4% should be the new standard-bearer. Bengen ran models showing how different portfolios, made up of varying blends of stocks and bonds, would have performed in the past. The two variables he looked for were 1) the initial withdrawal rate and 2) the mix between stocks and bonds. His calculations included the biggest market downturns, such as the Great Depression and the bear market of the early 1970s. Using the 4% rule, Bengen claimed, would help retirees avoid insolvency: Assuming a minimum requirement of 30 years of portfolio longevity, a first-year withdrawal of 4 percent, followed by inflation-adjusted withdrawals in subsequent years, should be safe. In no past case has it caused a portfolio to be exhausted before 33 years, and in most cases it will lead to portfolio lives of 50 years or longer. In other words, it's highly likely -- based on past data -- that the 4% rule will allow your nest egg to last at least 30 years (until your 90s) and perhaps 50 years or more. That's great news for those who plan to live to 120! Just as important, Bengen found that keeping between 50% to 75% of your nest egg in stocks was important. While stocks are more volatile in the short term, they provide higher returns than bonds in the long run. Because retirement can last anywhere from one to 40 years, long-term results matter. It's vitally important to understand the parameters of Bengen's research. Here are some key assumptions the 4% rule makes: Between 50% and 75% of your nest egg is invested in stocks, perhaps via low-fee exchange-traded funds. The remaining portion -- between 25% and 50% -- is invested in intermediate-term Treasury notes or some other sort of bond. Every year, these allocations are rebalanced to maintain your "ideal" allocation. Perhaps the most important assumption is that you do not become overly conservative if there are stock market declines. Lowering your withdrawal rate when the market dives is perfectly acceptable, but selling out of stocks and buying more bonds after market downturns can be disastrous. As Bengen points out: The client who retired in 1929 with $500,000 in a retirement fund saw that fund dwindle to less than $200,000 by the end of 1932. ... In this situation, with stocks having performed so dismally so early in retirement, it may be tempting to switch all investments to bonds in order to salvage what is left of the original capital. But that would be precisely the wrong thing to do! He goes on to explain how such a client would be committing the cardinal investing sin: buying high and then selling low, thereby locking in tremendous losses. Bengen goes on to demonstrate how this approach would lead to said client running out of money in less than 20 years. Had they left their allocation alone, the nest egg would have recovered nicely and lasted the duration of retirement. That's because every time the stock market has experienced a significant downturn, it has eventually bounced back even stronger. After falling 57% during the Great Recession, the S&P 500 has since advanced over 280%! The real killer: sequence risk! By far the biggest risk that retirees face -- especially if they choose to withdraw more than 4% from their nest egg -- is a huge drop in stocks, bonds, or (gasp) both in the first five years of retirement. In general, you will likely be safe if you are following the 4% rule. But if there's a stock market drop of over 60% in the first five years of your retirement, you should consider reducing the amount you pull out. The reason for this is twofold: The portion of the nest egg you withdraw will increase markedly above the 4% threshold. For example, say you have a $1 million nest egg. In year one, you'd withdraw 4%, or $40,000. But if the market drops 60% over the following year while inflation is flat, then according to the 4% rule, you'll need to withdraw $40,000 from the remaining balance of $384,000 the next year -- that's 10.4% of your nest egg! All of the money taken out does not get the chance to compound over the next 25 to 35 years. In other words, the extra 6% that you withdrew in the example would lose the growth it might have otherwise experienced. Here's an even better example of what I'm talking about. In this scenario, three different portfolios each earn 6% returns after inflation during normal years but suffer a 25% decline for two consecutive years at varying stages of retirement. The colored lines represent your retirement savings after the corresponding number of years of retirement. Chart showing nest egg values over time with large drops at different points in retirement More Chart by author. Assumes 6% returns during 33 of 35 years and 25% declines during the remaining two years. In all three scenarios, these retirees experience 33 years of 6% returns and just two consecutive years in which their portfolios drop 25% (for reference, the market lost a little over 50% in the financial crisis of 2008 and 2009). But as you can see, the timing of those drops makes an enormous difference. Real-life returns are never this regular, but the point is clearly illustrated: One of the greatest risks to your portfolio is a huge drop in your nest egg's returns during the first five years of retirement. If that fall comes later, the danger is mitigated because your portfolio has had plenty of time to grow. The dent isn't nearly as harmful. From this, there are two clear takeaways: If you experience a huge loss in your portfolio in your first five years of retirement, strongly consider taking out less money until your portfolio recovers. Retiring after a particularly bad year or two in the stock market can actually be a good thing. The once-in-a-decade market drop -- a 30% drop, for instance, occurs every 10 years -- has already occurred, and the chances are higher that you'll experience better-than-expected gains moving forward. This assumes that the market swoon didn't deplete your nest egg to the point where you need to withdraw more than 4% in year one. As I pointed out above, if you endure a serious market swoon in the first couple of years of retirement, it would be wise to lower your withdrawals -- but not reduce your stock allocation -- until the market recovers. There are other factors that may tempt you to change your withdrawal rates over time. For instance, if you're lucky enough to retire at a time when returns are above normal, your nest egg may continue to grow at a fast clip, regardless of your withdrawals. That may tempt you to start withdrawing more. While a modest increase in your withdrawals is acceptable -- and occasionally necessary for expenses such as medical procedures -- Bengen again cautions against dramatic changes. [Such retirees] must understand that excess returns earned today will probably be needed to offset losses in the future. They have enjoyed good luck, and nothing more. Good luck is too rare and precious to be squandered. As Bengen shows, increasing your withdrawals by even a few percentage points -- say, from 4% to 7% -- could prove disastrous if low returns and high inflation are just around the corner. As promised, we can now get to the part that covers all of your sources of income in retirement. Looking at your safe withdrawal rate is nice, but it doesn't tell the whole story. If you have a $500,000 nest egg, you might balk at spending just $20,000 per year. Chances are, however, you'll have more sources of income than this. Apart from your your nest egg, these may include: Social Security benefits Pension payouts Annuities Rental property Part-time work In 2017, the average American household with residents over 65 spent about $50,000 annually. Because this is the "mean," and we know that high spenders can pull this figure up, let's assume the "median" -- a number that better represents ordinary retirees -- is somewhere around $42,000 per year. Our hypothetical couple has a nest egg of $250,000. That may sound like a lot, but using the 4% rule, this comes out to just $10,000 per year that can be safely withdrawn. Luckily, there are other sources to consider. For instance, the average monthly Social Security retirement benefit paid in November 2018 was $1,374. Over the course of a year, assuming there are two beneficiaries in the household, that amounts to $33,000. Add in a $10,000 savings withdrawal, and this couple would cross our $42,000-per-year threshold. Of course, not all couples will fit this scenario. Some will have income from rental properties, and others will have pensions. And while some people scoff at the idea of working part-time in retirement, there are a few big side benefits to such work: It helps you maintain social contacts in your community. This is vitally important, as loneliness is the silent killer of American retirees. It keeps you active in your old age, helping you maintain your health. It likely won't require major obligations. If you need an extra $10,000 per year, that means finding a job that pays $15 an hour and doing it for just 13 hours per week. You need to consider all of these moving pieces to determine what the appropriate withdrawal rate will be for you. Taxes: They're a central part of retirement planning calculations. And they are ever-changing. Back when Bengen did his original analysis, Roth IRAs didn't even exist yet. It would be foolish to assume there will be no major changes in the tax code between now and when you pass away. So we need to come to terms with the fact that taxes will affect our investments, and we can't predict exactly how. That said, here's what we do know when it comes to withdrawing money from our nest egg: Cash that is taken out of Roth IRAs and Roth 401(k)s will not be taxed. If you take out 4% in year one, you get to spend all 4%. Cash that is taken out of traditional IRAs, 401(k)s, or 403(b)s will be taxed based on your income bracket. That means you'll end up paying somewhere between 10% and 20% of whatever you pull out of these accounts in taxes. That's vitally important to remember, as it essentially lowers the amount of your savings you can actually spend in a given year from 4% to around 3.2%-3.6%. That's a big difference. There's an endless number of ways in which your tax situation can affect your safe withdrawal rate. There's no way we could cover every situation in one article. That's why its important for you to consult a tax professional and map out how much you'll pay in taxes and how you'll cover that expense. Drawbacks of taking too much Withdrawing too much money from your nest egg increases your chances of running out of money while you're still alive. This can put a financial strain not only on you, but also on your family and friends, who may feel obligated to step in and help fund the gap. If you do decide to start withdrawing more money than the 4% rule dictates, it's much better to raise your distributions by modest amounts, and after you've been retired for five to 10 years. Of course, major life events like unexpected illness can change the calculus -- but you can only focus on the factors that you control. And if you're really worried about running out of money, you might consider lowering your initial withdrawals to 3.5%. Drawbacks of taking too little Because we humans are risk-averse, the thought of running out of money gets a lot of attention. The flip side of the coin rarely gets noticed, but it's worth mentioning: If you withdraw too little, you run the risk of never enjoying retirement. I'll be the first to argue that, beyond fulfilling your basic needs, money doesn't buy all that much sustainable happiness. That being said, if you keep putting off retirement, working in a job you don't love so that your nest egg, your ideal retirement budget, and the 4% rule line up just right, you might have a problem. And if you spend retirement living like a monk solely because you fear going broke, you may someday pass on with a lot of leftover money -- and a lot of missed opportunities to enjoy yourself. Step back from the situation and look at it from 30,000 feet. Money need not be an end unto itself; it is a tool to help you get the experiences you want from life. Only three things can really make you happy, according to Martin Seligman and Sonja Lyubomirsky, two leaders in the field of positive psychology: Purpose and meaning Healthy relationships Control over your own time Those last two items require flexibility in your schedule. Because of this, taking out a slightly higher amount -- say 4.5% -- might be a worthwhile decision if it means it will give you more time to focus on such things. Retirement surveys prove conclusively that the elderly are the most content, least stressed age group in the nation. And not only that, the benefits that come with ending mandatory work are lasting! Everyone's circumstances will be different. Running out of money is obviously a fate we all want to avoid. By carefully considering all these factors -- especially the 4% rule -- combining them with where you and your spouse are right now, and planning out what you'd like your Golden Years to look like, you should get a better idea for exactly what your own safe withdrawal rates will look like. More From The Motley Fool The Motley Fool has a disclosure policy. | A safe withdrawal rate is the percentage of your savings that you can, in theory, withdraw every year without running out of money while you're alive. There's no universally appropriate rate; the most popular rule of thumb is the 4% rule. | ctrlsum | 1 | https://news.yahoo.com/safe-withdrawal-rate-retirement-010500468.html | 0.36727 |
What Is a Safe Withdrawal Rate in Retirement? | Retirement is a relatively new idea. In 1880, four-fifths of men over 65 were still working. The world we live in today is very different. The life expectancy of 65-and-up Americans has risen by several years, yet their labor force participation rate is under 25%. We rely on other sources of income to provide for us in our latter years. Because of all this, we need to think carefully about how much money we pull from our savings each year in retirement. Enter the "safe withdrawal rate" -- the percentage of your savings that you can, in theory, withdraw every year without running out of money while you're alive. Let's go over how to figure out what your safe withdrawal rate may be and how this number can help you plan your retirement. Image source: Getty Images. The idea behind a safe withdrawal rate is simple: It tells you how much money you can pull from your savings in year one of retirement. After that, you can adjust that rate every year to account for inflation. As we get into the nitty gritty of figuring out your safe withdrawal rate, keep in mind that there's no universally appropriate rate. Everyone's life and financial circumstances are unique. Having said that, the most popular rule of thumb is the 4% rule. This means that if you have a nest egg of $600,000, you should take out $24,000 in your first year (4% of $600,000), and then increase that amount in year two based on inflation. This is a key distinction: You do not take out 4% of your nest egg every year. You only do so in the first year, and then you make cost-of-living adjustments every year after that based on the rate of inflation. You can find recent inflation rates on websites such as USInflationCalculator.com, which shows you in a chart what the inflation rate has been for each of the past 10 years. If, for instance, inflation after year one stood at 3%, then it would be "safe" to withdraw $24,720 in year two ($24,000 X 1.03). That extra $720 would help make up for the rise in the prices of everyday goods like food and gasoline. You may think $24,000 isn't much to live on. But as we'll cover below, your nest egg is just one of (hopefully) many sources of income you can draw on in retirement. The 4% rule has an interesting origin story. For a long time, financial advisors believed it safe to withdraw up to 5% of your retirement portfolio in year one of retirement and make the same adjustments. But in 1994, financial advisor William Bengen released a landmark paper that shifted the debate markedly. According to his research, 4% should be the new standard-bearer. Bengen ran models showing how different portfolios, made up of varying blends of stocks and bonds, would have performed in the past. The two variables he looked for were 1) the initial withdrawal rate and 2) the mix between stocks and bonds. His calculations included the biggest market downturns, such as the Great Depression and the bear market of the early 1970s. Using the 4% rule, Bengen claimed, would help retirees avoid insolvency: Assuming a minimum requirement of 30 years of portfolio longevity, a first-year withdrawal of 4 percent, followed by inflation-adjusted withdrawals in subsequent years, should be safe. In no past case has it caused a portfolio to be exhausted before 33 years, and in most cases it will lead to portfolio lives of 50 years or longer. In other words, it's highly likely -- based on past data -- that the 4% rule will allow your nest egg to last at least 30 years (until your 90s) and perhaps 50 years or more. That's great news for those who plan to live to 120! Just as important, Bengen found that keeping between 50% to 75% of your nest egg in stocks was important. While stocks are more volatile in the short term, they provide higher returns than bonds in the long run. Because retirement can last anywhere from one to 40 years, long-term results matter. It's vitally important to understand the parameters of Bengen's research. Here are some key assumptions the 4% rule makes: Between 50% and 75% of your nest egg is invested in stocks, perhaps via low-fee exchange-traded funds. The remaining portion -- between 25% and 50% -- is invested in intermediate-term Treasury notes or some other sort of bond. Every year, these allocations are rebalanced to maintain your "ideal" allocation. Perhaps the most important assumption is that you do not become overly conservative if there are stock market declines. Lowering your withdrawal rate when the market dives is perfectly acceptable, but selling out of stocks and buying more bonds after market downturns can be disastrous. As Bengen points out: The client who retired in 1929 with $500,000 in a retirement fund saw that fund dwindle to less than $200,000 by the end of 1932. ... In this situation, with stocks having performed so dismally so early in retirement, it may be tempting to switch all investments to bonds in order to salvage what is left of the original capital. But that would be precisely the wrong thing to do! He goes on to explain how such a client would be committing the cardinal investing sin: buying high and then selling low, thereby locking in tremendous losses. Bengen goes on to demonstrate how this approach would lead to said client running out of money in less than 20 years. Had they left their allocation alone, the nest egg would have recovered nicely and lasted the duration of retirement. That's because every time the stock market has experienced a significant downturn, it has eventually bounced back even stronger. After falling 57% during the Great Recession, the S&P 500 has since advanced over 280%! The real killer: sequence risk! By far the biggest risk that retirees face -- especially if they choose to withdraw more than 4% from their nest egg -- is a huge drop in stocks, bonds, or (gasp) both in the first five years of retirement. In general, you will likely be safe if you are following the 4% rule. But if there's a stock market drop of over 60% in the first five years of your retirement, you should consider reducing the amount you pull out. The reason for this is twofold: The portion of the nest egg you withdraw will increase markedly above the 4% threshold. For example, say you have a $1 million nest egg. In year one, you'd withdraw 4%, or $40,000. But if the market drops 60% over the following year while inflation is flat, then according to the 4% rule, you'll need to withdraw $40,000 from the remaining balance of $384,000 the next year -- that's 10.4% of your nest egg! All of the money taken out does not get the chance to compound over the next 25 to 35 years. In other words, the extra 6% that you withdrew in the example would lose the growth it might have otherwise experienced. Here's an even better example of what I'm talking about. In this scenario, three different portfolios each earn 6% returns after inflation during normal years but suffer a 25% decline for two consecutive years at varying stages of retirement. The colored lines represent your retirement savings after the corresponding number of years of retirement. Chart showing nest egg values over time with large drops at different points in retirement More Chart by author. Assumes 6% returns during 33 of 35 years and 25% declines during the remaining two years. In all three scenarios, these retirees experience 33 years of 6% returns and just two consecutive years in which their portfolios drop 25% (for reference, the market lost a little over 50% in the financial crisis of 2008 and 2009). But as you can see, the timing of those drops makes an enormous difference. Real-life returns are never this regular, but the point is clearly illustrated: One of the greatest risks to your portfolio is a huge drop in your nest egg's returns during the first five years of retirement. If that fall comes later, the danger is mitigated because your portfolio has had plenty of time to grow. The dent isn't nearly as harmful. From this, there are two clear takeaways: If you experience a huge loss in your portfolio in your first five years of retirement, strongly consider taking out less money until your portfolio recovers. Retiring after a particularly bad year or two in the stock market can actually be a good thing. The once-in-a-decade market drop -- a 30% drop, for instance, occurs every 10 years -- has already occurred, and the chances are higher that you'll experience better-than-expected gains moving forward. This assumes that the market swoon didn't deplete your nest egg to the point where you need to withdraw more than 4% in year one. As I pointed out above, if you endure a serious market swoon in the first couple of years of retirement, it would be wise to lower your withdrawals -- but not reduce your stock allocation -- until the market recovers. There are other factors that may tempt you to change your withdrawal rates over time. For instance, if you're lucky enough to retire at a time when returns are above normal, your nest egg may continue to grow at a fast clip, regardless of your withdrawals. That may tempt you to start withdrawing more. While a modest increase in your withdrawals is acceptable -- and occasionally necessary for expenses such as medical procedures -- Bengen again cautions against dramatic changes. [Such retirees] must understand that excess returns earned today will probably be needed to offset losses in the future. They have enjoyed good luck, and nothing more. Good luck is too rare and precious to be squandered. As Bengen shows, increasing your withdrawals by even a few percentage points -- say, from 4% to 7% -- could prove disastrous if low returns and high inflation are just around the corner. As promised, we can now get to the part that covers all of your sources of income in retirement. Looking at your safe withdrawal rate is nice, but it doesn't tell the whole story. If you have a $500,000 nest egg, you might balk at spending just $20,000 per year. Chances are, however, you'll have more sources of income than this. Apart from your your nest egg, these may include: Social Security benefits Pension payouts Annuities Rental property Part-time work In 2017, the average American household with residents over 65 spent about $50,000 annually. Because this is the "mean," and we know that high spenders can pull this figure up, let's assume the "median" -- a number that better represents ordinary retirees -- is somewhere around $42,000 per year. Our hypothetical couple has a nest egg of $250,000. That may sound like a lot, but using the 4% rule, this comes out to just $10,000 per year that can be safely withdrawn. Luckily, there are other sources to consider. For instance, the average monthly Social Security retirement benefit paid in November 2018 was $1,374. Over the course of a year, assuming there are two beneficiaries in the household, that amounts to $33,000. Add in a $10,000 savings withdrawal, and this couple would cross our $42,000-per-year threshold. Of course, not all couples will fit this scenario. Some will have income from rental properties, and others will have pensions. And while some people scoff at the idea of working part-time in retirement, there are a few big side benefits to such work: It helps you maintain social contacts in your community. This is vitally important, as loneliness is the silent killer of American retirees. It keeps you active in your old age, helping you maintain your health. It likely won't require major obligations. If you need an extra $10,000 per year, that means finding a job that pays $15 an hour and doing it for just 13 hours per week. You need to consider all of these moving pieces to determine what the appropriate withdrawal rate will be for you. Taxes: They're a central part of retirement planning calculations. And they are ever-changing. Back when Bengen did his original analysis, Roth IRAs didn't even exist yet. It would be foolish to assume there will be no major changes in the tax code between now and when you pass away. So we need to come to terms with the fact that taxes will affect our investments, and we can't predict exactly how. That said, here's what we do know when it comes to withdrawing money from our nest egg: Cash that is taken out of Roth IRAs and Roth 401(k)s will not be taxed. If you take out 4% in year one, you get to spend all 4%. Cash that is taken out of traditional IRAs, 401(k)s, or 403(b)s will be taxed based on your income bracket. That means you'll end up paying somewhere between 10% and 20% of whatever you pull out of these accounts in taxes. That's vitally important to remember, as it essentially lowers the amount of your savings you can actually spend in a given year from 4% to around 3.2%-3.6%. That's a big difference. There's an endless number of ways in which your tax situation can affect your safe withdrawal rate. There's no way we could cover every situation in one article. That's why its important for you to consult a tax professional and map out how much you'll pay in taxes and how you'll cover that expense. Drawbacks of taking too much Withdrawing too much money from your nest egg increases your chances of running out of money while you're still alive. This can put a financial strain not only on you, but also on your family and friends, who may feel obligated to step in and help fund the gap. If you do decide to start withdrawing more money than the 4% rule dictates, it's much better to raise your distributions by modest amounts, and after you've been retired for five to 10 years. Of course, major life events like unexpected illness can change the calculus -- but you can only focus on the factors that you control. And if you're really worried about running out of money, you might consider lowering your initial withdrawals to 3.5%. Drawbacks of taking too little Because we humans are risk-averse, the thought of running out of money gets a lot of attention. The flip side of the coin rarely gets noticed, but it's worth mentioning: If you withdraw too little, you run the risk of never enjoying retirement. I'll be the first to argue that, beyond fulfilling your basic needs, money doesn't buy all that much sustainable happiness. That being said, if you keep putting off retirement, working in a job you don't love so that your nest egg, your ideal retirement budget, and the 4% rule line up just right, you might have a problem. And if you spend retirement living like a monk solely because you fear going broke, you may someday pass on with a lot of leftover money -- and a lot of missed opportunities to enjoy yourself. Step back from the situation and look at it from 30,000 feet. Money need not be an end unto itself; it is a tool to help you get the experiences you want from life. Only three things can really make you happy, according to Martin Seligman and Sonja Lyubomirsky, two leaders in the field of positive psychology: Purpose and meaning Healthy relationships Control over your own time Those last two items require flexibility in your schedule. Because of this, taking out a slightly higher amount -- say 4.5% -- might be a worthwhile decision if it means it will give you more time to focus on such things. Retirement surveys prove conclusively that the elderly are the most content, least stressed age group in the nation. And not only that, the benefits that come with ending mandatory work are lasting! Everyone's circumstances will be different. Running out of money is obviously a fate we all want to avoid. By carefully considering all these factors -- especially the 4% rule -- combining them with where you and your spouse are right now, and planning out what you'd like your Golden Years to look like, you should get a better idea for exactly what your own safe withdrawal rates will look like. More From The Motley Fool The Motley Fool has a disclosure policy. | "Safe withdrawal rate" is the percentage of savings you can withdraw every year in retirement. The 4% rule says you should take out $24,000 in your first year (4% of $600,000) It's highly likely your nest egg will last at least 30 years (until your 90s) and perhaps 50 years or more. | pegasus | 2 | https://news.yahoo.com/safe-withdrawal-rate-retirement-010500468.html | 0.562125 |
Can I be forced to pay for college? | When we divorced, I had a good paying job. The idea of eventually contributing to college for our daughter seemed like a no-brainer. I agreed we would figure out how to share the cost at the appropriate time. That time has come and we cannot agree. Our daughter wants to attend Trinity College. But during the market crash of 2009, my company went under. I have struggled to maintain employment since and went from earning $300,000 per year to earning $60,000. I had to sell my house in a short sale and have been renting ever since. My ex took me back to court, asking that I be ordered to pay $25,000 per year of our daughters college expenses for the next four years. That is more than 40 percent of my gross income. My only remaining asset is my retirement. I cannot afford a lawyer to help me with this. My former in-laws have hired a lawyer for my ex. We are going to court in early February and the lawyer keeps telling me I need to just agree to pay because they are asking for less than half the cost and the judge will order me to either take it out of my retirement or take out a parent loan. Two things a judge cannot order you to do and expect the order to be upheld by the appeals court are: Order you to withdraw money from your retirement to finance college education, and order you to apply for and incur substantial loan debt to send your child to college. If you only earn $60,000 per year, it is unlikely a bank or lending institution would approve your application for $25,000 per year for your childs college education. You dont have sufficient assets or income to support such a loan. You should argue that it is improper to expect you to do either thing and ask the judge to deny the motion. You should also understand that if you are ordered to pay, the order should not exceed one-half of the cost of UMass Amherst. So, while it is still a hefty payment for someone in your income bracket, it is not 40 percent of your gross. Different judges have different theories about how much parents should be obligated to contribute to college after all, married parents cannot be ordered by the state to contribute to their childrens college educations. Some judges believe in making the child equally responsible with the parents, in which case your outside limit should be one-third of the cost of UMass. If the wind seems to be blowing in the direction of some contribution, argue your daughter should have some skin in the game. Finally, dont hesitate to have a frank conversation with your daughter about your desire to help her attend a less expensive school. Wendy O. Hickey has since 1994 been involved in and since 2003 been a trial lawyer who concentrates her practice on national and international family law. Any legal advice in this column is general in nature, and does not establish a lawyer-client relationship. Send questions to dearwendy@bostonherald.com. | A judge cannot order you to withdraw money from your retirement to finance college education. | pegasus | 0 | https://www.bostonherald.com/2019/01/20/wendy-5/ | 0.124102 |
Can I be forced to pay for college? | When we divorced, I had a good paying job. The idea of eventually contributing to college for our daughter seemed like a no-brainer. I agreed we would figure out how to share the cost at the appropriate time. That time has come and we cannot agree. Our daughter wants to attend Trinity College. But during the market crash of 2009, my company went under. I have struggled to maintain employment since and went from earning $300,000 per year to earning $60,000. I had to sell my house in a short sale and have been renting ever since. My ex took me back to court, asking that I be ordered to pay $25,000 per year of our daughters college expenses for the next four years. That is more than 40 percent of my gross income. My only remaining asset is my retirement. I cannot afford a lawyer to help me with this. My former in-laws have hired a lawyer for my ex. We are going to court in early February and the lawyer keeps telling me I need to just agree to pay because they are asking for less than half the cost and the judge will order me to either take it out of my retirement or take out a parent loan. Two things a judge cannot order you to do and expect the order to be upheld by the appeals court are: Order you to withdraw money from your retirement to finance college education, and order you to apply for and incur substantial loan debt to send your child to college. If you only earn $60,000 per year, it is unlikely a bank or lending institution would approve your application for $25,000 per year for your childs college education. You dont have sufficient assets or income to support such a loan. You should argue that it is improper to expect you to do either thing and ask the judge to deny the motion. You should also understand that if you are ordered to pay, the order should not exceed one-half of the cost of UMass Amherst. So, while it is still a hefty payment for someone in your income bracket, it is not 40 percent of your gross. Different judges have different theories about how much parents should be obligated to contribute to college after all, married parents cannot be ordered by the state to contribute to their childrens college educations. Some judges believe in making the child equally responsible with the parents, in which case your outside limit should be one-third of the cost of UMass. If the wind seems to be blowing in the direction of some contribution, argue your daughter should have some skin in the game. Finally, dont hesitate to have a frank conversation with your daughter about your desire to help her attend a less expensive school. Wendy O. Hickey has since 1994 been involved in and since 2003 been a trial lawyer who concentrates her practice on national and international family law. Any legal advice in this column is general in nature, and does not establish a lawyer-client relationship. Send questions to dearwendy@bostonherald.com. | A judge cannot order you to withdraw money from your retirement to finance college education. If you only earn $60,000 per year, it is unlikely a bank or lending institution would approve your application for $25,000 per year for your childs college education. | pegasus | 2 | https://www.bostonherald.com/2019/01/20/wendy-5/ | 0.106065 |
What alleged illegality is Mueller investigating? Trump exercising lawful presidential authority? | Special Counsel Robert Mueller wants to interview President Trump. We know that is true because the areas of inquiry that Mueller is interested in have been leaked. But the questions Mueller is looking at are not about the issue the special counsel was supposed to examine: collusion with Russians to fix the 2016 presidential election. Flynn had nothing to do with the special counsels probe. And firing the head of the FBI does not thwart what all the people under him are doing. It is beside the point at this time that there is no such crime as colluding. It is beside the point at this time that Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein was so negligent in his drafting the appointment of Mueller that he did not limit the investigation in either scope or time. By agreeing to be interviewed by Mueller, Mr. President, you are agreeing to be questioned about exercising your executive authority in areas having nothing to do with any illegality or even collusion. Rosensteins omission resulted in Paul Manafort, former chairman of the Trump presidential campaign, being indicted for alleged financial crimes occurring years before he worked for Donald Trump. These alleged crimes have nothing to do with Russian collusion. It is not beside the point that a prosecutor wants to interview the president of the United States about conduct that is not only legal, but actually involves the execution of presidential authority. Two men have already fallen into Muellers trap. Retired Army Lt. Gen. Michael Flynn pleaded guilty to making statements inconsistent with tapped and taped conversations with Russian Ambassador to the U.S. Sergey Kislyak. But Flynns entire conversation was legal, or his statements would have been part of the charges against him. One might ask why the FBI, having the entire transcript of a conversation that contained nothing illegal, even questioned Flynn at all. This was the legal equivalent of the FBI showing up to ask you what you had for breakfast theres nothing illegal about eating breakfast. If you do not want to admit you had a glazed donut and reply yogurt, the prosecutor can charge you with making a false statement to the FBI. George Papadopoulos, an adviser to the Trump presidential campaign, pleaded guilty to providing false statements about the timing of his contacts with certain Russians. But the contacts were legal no matter when they occurred or they, too, would have been part of the charges against him. The caveat is not limited to a prosecutors questioning a person about legal conduct. There is also the danger of two people differing in their statements about an event and the prosecutor without any other evidence supporting one side or the other indicting one of them. But it did. Vice President Dick Cheneys chief of staff, Scooter Libby (my longtime friend and sometime client), told the FBI he had not told then-New York Times reporter Judith Miller that Valerie Plame was a covert CIA agent something prohibited under federal law. Miller remembered it differently when she was interviewed by the FBI and so testified at trial. There was no other evidence to support Miller. Libby was charged and convicted of making a false statement. Later, Miller read Plames autobiography Fair Game and realized that she had been misled by Special Counsel Patrick Fitzgerald, a close personal friend of Comey, who had appointed him to the position. As a result, her testimony about Libby made no sense she wrote in her book The Story: A Reporters Journey. Millers recantation was ignored by the media. Equally appalling and reminiscent of todays brouhaha over Russian collusion, there was no crime involving Libby. Comey knew when he appointed Fitzgerald that Deputy Secretary of State Richard Armitage was the first person to discuss Plames CIA relationship when he disclosed it to columnist Robert Novak in 2003. Armitage admitted this in 2006. If that investigation had been kosher, Armitage would have been indicted. Case over. Plame worked for the CIA but she was not covert as defined in the law that I personally drafted. Perhaps the reason for focusing the investigation on Libby and not Armitage was the fact that Fitzgerald repeatedly told Libbys lawyers that unless Libby deliver(ed) someone higher up the vice president he would be indicted. Heres my advice to President Trump: By agreeing to be interviewed by Mueller, Mr. President, you are agreeing to be questioned about exercising your executive authority in areas having nothing to do with any illegality or even collusion. In agreeing to this you may recall that an event occurred on Monday and Comey may recall it occurred on Tuesday. A la Papdoupoulos, only the timing is off. | Ruben Navarrette: There is no such crime as colluding with Russia. He says the questions Mueller is looking at are not about collusion with Russians. Trump is being questioned about exercising lawful presidential authority, he says. | ctrlsum | 1 | https://www.foxnews.com/opinion/what-alleged-illegality-is-mueller-investigating-trump-exercising-lawful-presidential-authority | 0.171944 |
How many people actually die in national parks? | The risk of being injured or killed while visiting a national park is very low, according to the National Park Service. When looking at fatality rates during the 2007-2013 timeframe, the average rate is 0.57 deaths [per] 1 million visits, said Jeremy Barnum, public affairs officer at National Park Service. Between 2007 and 2013, in all 59 parks, there were 1,025 fatalities. On average, approximately 160 visitors per year die while visiting national parks-- out of more 305 million visitors. In general, visitors can stay safe if they follow simple rules , Barnum said. Always plan and prepare, select the most appropriate activity that matches your skill set and experience, seek information before and when arriving at the park about hazards and environmental conditions, follow the rules and regulations, and use sound judgment while recreating. The leading causes of unintentional visitor fatalities in national parks, based on data collected by the NPS Public Risk Management Program from 2007 to 2013, are drownings, motor vehicle crashes, and falls. But there are some more unusual recorded ones, too. Here are the top six causes of death in national parks: 1. Drowning Drowning is by far the most common cause of death in national parks. The number of fatal accidents while swimming has increased every year, from 32 in 2007; 31 in 2008; 41 in 2009; 42 in 2010 and 2011; 45 in 2012, to 59 in 2013. The total number of drownings over the seven-year period, including boat, kayak and rafting incidents, is 365. Only seven of these deaths were the result of rip currents. 2. Motor Vehicle Crash National parks may not have crowded streets or busy highways, but reckless drivers can be found everywhere. A total of 143 people died as the result of a car crash between 2007 and 2013, and 42 of the victims were on a motorcycle. There were six fatalities involving bikers and seven involving pedestrians. 3. Falling or Slipping Falling and slipping while hiking is the third most common cause of death in national parks; 169 people died between 2007 and 2013. There were four fatalities in which a falling tree hit by lightning killed someone and five cases in which falling rocks or ice caused deaths. Falls are a real concern on the Precipice Trail in Acadia National Park, because steep drops and open cliffs make the walk very tricky. More from The Active Times: 50 Reasons to Love the National Parks All 59 National Parks Ranked The Great American Bucket List: 50 Things to Do in the U.S. Before You Die The Most Dangerous Places in National Parks 4. Nature Extreme weather like flash floods and lightning, which can only be blamed on Mother Nature, caused the least number of deaths between 2007 and 2013 just eight. Other environmental-related incidents, such as heat illness, cold exposure, and avalanche, killed more park visitors 26, 19, and 33, respectively. Park authorities say these incidents occur when guests are not well-prepared when going into the wilderness. Consider avalanches. Shouting and loud noises dont cause them; they are usually triggered by weight a person walking in the wrong spot or a strong wind is enough to do the trick. 5. Poisoning Carbon monoxide has been the cause of two deaths in national parks in the last seven years, and drugs and alcohol have been the cause of three. The cause of one death is yet to be determined. Still, thats just six poisonings in seven years. 6. Wildlife or Animals One of the many reasons people visit national parks is to spot wildlife. But for some people, getting a little too close may just be their last encounter. Six people have died due to wildlife and animals. The most common cause of death was grizzly bear attacks, while others were mountain goats and snakebites. | Between 2007 and 2013, in all 59 parks, there were 1,025 fatalities. | pegasus | 0 | https://www.foxnews.com/travel/how-many-people-actually-die-in-national-parks | 0.286863 |
How many people actually die in national parks? | The risk of being injured or killed while visiting a national park is very low, according to the National Park Service. When looking at fatality rates during the 2007-2013 timeframe, the average rate is 0.57 deaths [per] 1 million visits, said Jeremy Barnum, public affairs officer at National Park Service. Between 2007 and 2013, in all 59 parks, there were 1,025 fatalities. On average, approximately 160 visitors per year die while visiting national parks-- out of more 305 million visitors. In general, visitors can stay safe if they follow simple rules , Barnum said. Always plan and prepare, select the most appropriate activity that matches your skill set and experience, seek information before and when arriving at the park about hazards and environmental conditions, follow the rules and regulations, and use sound judgment while recreating. The leading causes of unintentional visitor fatalities in national parks, based on data collected by the NPS Public Risk Management Program from 2007 to 2013, are drownings, motor vehicle crashes, and falls. But there are some more unusual recorded ones, too. Here are the top six causes of death in national parks: 1. Drowning Drowning is by far the most common cause of death in national parks. The number of fatal accidents while swimming has increased every year, from 32 in 2007; 31 in 2008; 41 in 2009; 42 in 2010 and 2011; 45 in 2012, to 59 in 2013. The total number of drownings over the seven-year period, including boat, kayak and rafting incidents, is 365. Only seven of these deaths were the result of rip currents. 2. Motor Vehicle Crash National parks may not have crowded streets or busy highways, but reckless drivers can be found everywhere. A total of 143 people died as the result of a car crash between 2007 and 2013, and 42 of the victims were on a motorcycle. There were six fatalities involving bikers and seven involving pedestrians. 3. Falling or Slipping Falling and slipping while hiking is the third most common cause of death in national parks; 169 people died between 2007 and 2013. There were four fatalities in which a falling tree hit by lightning killed someone and five cases in which falling rocks or ice caused deaths. Falls are a real concern on the Precipice Trail in Acadia National Park, because steep drops and open cliffs make the walk very tricky. More from The Active Times: 50 Reasons to Love the National Parks All 59 National Parks Ranked The Great American Bucket List: 50 Things to Do in the U.S. Before You Die The Most Dangerous Places in National Parks 4. Nature Extreme weather like flash floods and lightning, which can only be blamed on Mother Nature, caused the least number of deaths between 2007 and 2013 just eight. Other environmental-related incidents, such as heat illness, cold exposure, and avalanche, killed more park visitors 26, 19, and 33, respectively. Park authorities say these incidents occur when guests are not well-prepared when going into the wilderness. Consider avalanches. Shouting and loud noises dont cause them; they are usually triggered by weight a person walking in the wrong spot or a strong wind is enough to do the trick. 5. Poisoning Carbon monoxide has been the cause of two deaths in national parks in the last seven years, and drugs and alcohol have been the cause of three. The cause of one death is yet to be determined. Still, thats just six poisonings in seven years. 6. Wildlife or Animals One of the many reasons people visit national parks is to spot wildlife. But for some people, getting a little too close may just be their last encounter. Six people have died due to wildlife and animals. The most common cause of death was grizzly bear attacks, while others were mountain goats and snakebites. | Between 2007 and 2013, in all 59 parks, there were 1,025 fatalities. On average, approximately 160 visitors per year die while visiting national parks. | bart | 1 | https://www.foxnews.com/travel/how-many-people-actually-die-in-national-parks | 0.592388 |
How many people actually die in national parks? | The risk of being injured or killed while visiting a national park is very low, according to the National Park Service. When looking at fatality rates during the 2007-2013 timeframe, the average rate is 0.57 deaths [per] 1 million visits, said Jeremy Barnum, public affairs officer at National Park Service. Between 2007 and 2013, in all 59 parks, there were 1,025 fatalities. On average, approximately 160 visitors per year die while visiting national parks-- out of more 305 million visitors. In general, visitors can stay safe if they follow simple rules , Barnum said. Always plan and prepare, select the most appropriate activity that matches your skill set and experience, seek information before and when arriving at the park about hazards and environmental conditions, follow the rules and regulations, and use sound judgment while recreating. The leading causes of unintentional visitor fatalities in national parks, based on data collected by the NPS Public Risk Management Program from 2007 to 2013, are drownings, motor vehicle crashes, and falls. But there are some more unusual recorded ones, too. Here are the top six causes of death in national parks: 1. Drowning Drowning is by far the most common cause of death in national parks. The number of fatal accidents while swimming has increased every year, from 32 in 2007; 31 in 2008; 41 in 2009; 42 in 2010 and 2011; 45 in 2012, to 59 in 2013. The total number of drownings over the seven-year period, including boat, kayak and rafting incidents, is 365. Only seven of these deaths were the result of rip currents. 2. Motor Vehicle Crash National parks may not have crowded streets or busy highways, but reckless drivers can be found everywhere. A total of 143 people died as the result of a car crash between 2007 and 2013, and 42 of the victims were on a motorcycle. There were six fatalities involving bikers and seven involving pedestrians. 3. Falling or Slipping Falling and slipping while hiking is the third most common cause of death in national parks; 169 people died between 2007 and 2013. There were four fatalities in which a falling tree hit by lightning killed someone and five cases in which falling rocks or ice caused deaths. Falls are a real concern on the Precipice Trail in Acadia National Park, because steep drops and open cliffs make the walk very tricky. More from The Active Times: 50 Reasons to Love the National Parks All 59 National Parks Ranked The Great American Bucket List: 50 Things to Do in the U.S. Before You Die The Most Dangerous Places in National Parks 4. Nature Extreme weather like flash floods and lightning, which can only be blamed on Mother Nature, caused the least number of deaths between 2007 and 2013 just eight. Other environmental-related incidents, such as heat illness, cold exposure, and avalanche, killed more park visitors 26, 19, and 33, respectively. Park authorities say these incidents occur when guests are not well-prepared when going into the wilderness. Consider avalanches. Shouting and loud noises dont cause them; they are usually triggered by weight a person walking in the wrong spot or a strong wind is enough to do the trick. 5. Poisoning Carbon monoxide has been the cause of two deaths in national parks in the last seven years, and drugs and alcohol have been the cause of three. The cause of one death is yet to be determined. Still, thats just six poisonings in seven years. 6. Wildlife or Animals One of the many reasons people visit national parks is to spot wildlife. But for some people, getting a little too close may just be their last encounter. Six people have died due to wildlife and animals. The most common cause of death was grizzly bear attacks, while others were mountain goats and snakebites. | Between 2007 and 2013, in all 59 parks, there were 1,025 fatalities. On average, approximately 160 visitors per year die while visiting national parks. The leading causes of unintentional visitor fatalities in national parks are drownings, motor vehicle crashes, and falls. In general, visitors can stay safe if they follow simple rules. | bart | 2 | https://www.foxnews.com/travel/how-many-people-actually-die-in-national-parks | 0.719937 |
Is My Social Security Income Being Taxed Twice? | Each month, nearly 63 million people receive a Social Security benefit check, making it arguably the most important social program in America. Of these recipients, an analysis by the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities finds that more than a third are kept out of poverty as a result of this guaranteed monthly payout. But this payout for eligible beneficiaries has folks asking whether they're getting what they deserve. In other words, taking into account how Social Security is funded, there's the idea that, when you retire, your Social Security income is being taxed twice, thereby reducing your take-home pay. Before answering that question, it first really helps to understand how the program is funded. Two Social Security cards lying atop a large fanned pile of cash bills. More Image source: Getty Images. Understanding how Social Security collects approximately $1 trillion a year In 2017, Social Security collected $996.6 billion in revenue from three income sources. The bulk of this revenue ($873.6 billion) came from a 12.4% payroll tax on earned income, which, in 2019, ranges between $0.01 and $132,900. What this means is that paid wages of up to $132,900 are hit with a 12.4% payroll tax paid either by you entirely if you're self-employed or split between you and your employer (6.2% each). Any earned income above $132,900 is exempt from the payroll tax. Another $37.9 billion was generated from the taxation of Social Security benefits for individuals and couples earning over select income thresholds. The first threshold, passed in 1983 and introduced a year later, allows up to half of an individual's benefits to be taxed at ordinary federal rates if their adjusted gross income (AGI), plus one half of their benefits, exceeds $25,000. For couples filing jointly, this figure is over $32,000. A second threshold, passed in 1993, allows up to 85% of an individual's benefits to be taxed if their AGI, plus one-half of their benefits, exceeds $34,000. For couples filing jointly, this figure is more than $44,000. And finally, $85.1 billion was generated from the interest income on Social Security's asset reserves. The program has built up nearly $2.9 trillion in cash surpluses since 1983, and this surplus is invested in special-issue government bonds that pay interest, as required by law. The almost-2.9% average yield on these bonds led to just over $85 billion in interest income in 2017. | Yes, when you retire, your Social Security income is being taxed twice, thereby reducing your take-home pay. | ctrlsum | 0 | https://news.yahoo.com/social-security-income-being-taxed-110600786.html | 0.501227 |
Is My Social Security Income Being Taxed Twice? | Each month, nearly 63 million people receive a Social Security benefit check, making it arguably the most important social program in America. Of these recipients, an analysis by the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities finds that more than a third are kept out of poverty as a result of this guaranteed monthly payout. But this payout for eligible beneficiaries has folks asking whether they're getting what they deserve. In other words, taking into account how Social Security is funded, there's the idea that, when you retire, your Social Security income is being taxed twice, thereby reducing your take-home pay. Before answering that question, it first really helps to understand how the program is funded. Two Social Security cards lying atop a large fanned pile of cash bills. More Image source: Getty Images. Understanding how Social Security collects approximately $1 trillion a year In 2017, Social Security collected $996.6 billion in revenue from three income sources. The bulk of this revenue ($873.6 billion) came from a 12.4% payroll tax on earned income, which, in 2019, ranges between $0.01 and $132,900. What this means is that paid wages of up to $132,900 are hit with a 12.4% payroll tax paid either by you entirely if you're self-employed or split between you and your employer (6.2% each). Any earned income above $132,900 is exempt from the payroll tax. Another $37.9 billion was generated from the taxation of Social Security benefits for individuals and couples earning over select income thresholds. The first threshold, passed in 1983 and introduced a year later, allows up to half of an individual's benefits to be taxed at ordinary federal rates if their adjusted gross income (AGI), plus one half of their benefits, exceeds $25,000. For couples filing jointly, this figure is over $32,000. A second threshold, passed in 1993, allows up to 85% of an individual's benefits to be taxed if their AGI, plus one-half of their benefits, exceeds $34,000. For couples filing jointly, this figure is more than $44,000. And finally, $85.1 billion was generated from the interest income on Social Security's asset reserves. The program has built up nearly $2.9 trillion in cash surpluses since 1983, and this surplus is invested in special-issue government bonds that pay interest, as required by law. The almost-2.9% average yield on these bonds led to just over $85 billion in interest income in 2017. | Yes, when you retire, your Social Security income is being taxed twice, thereby reducing your take-home pay. In 2017, Social Security collected $996.6 billion in revenue from three income sources. | ctrlsum | 1 | https://news.yahoo.com/social-security-income-being-taxed-110600786.html | 0.542897 |
What's Next For Manny Pacquiao After Beating Adrien Broner? | On Saturday night at the MGM Grand in Las Vegas, Manny Pacquiao didn't look like a future Hall of Famer who was too old to compete on an elite level. Pacquiao easily outfought Adrien Broner and retained his WBA "regular" title in the process with a unanimous-decision victory. Pay no attention to Broner's erroneous claims that he won the fight. Pacquiao outworked him and deserved the decision. After a decisive win, Pacquiao now wants a rematch with Floyd Mayweather Jr. and the massive paycheck that will come with the fight. Mayweather was on hand for Saturday's bout, but when Showtime's Jim Gray tried to corner him with inquiries about a rematch, Money wouldn't take the bait. With Mayweather non-committal, the 40-year-old Pacquiao won't be able to wait on him for long. While he looked the part of an ageless wonder on Saturday, the truth is he needs to stay active if he wants to remain elite. Fortunately for Pacquiao, he has signed with Premier Boxing Champions, and that should make negotiations with most of the top welterweights pretty simple. Here are the top options for Pacquiao if Mayweather won't come out of retirement for another mega fight. Danny Garcia The timelines don't align perfectly for Pacquiao and Garcia, but it seems like a makeable fight. Garcia is set to face the tough Adrian Granados on April 20. If he wins, which isn't a given, a Garcia-Pacquiao bout would be of some interest. Garcia doesn't have the biggest name in the welterweight division, but he's a former world champion and far from a total unknown. We'll have to see what the pay-per-view numbers were from Saturday's bout, but a Pacquiao-Garcia bout might be one best suited for Showtime. Keith Thurman Pacquiao and Thurman are on nearly identical timelines. Thurman makes his long-awaited return on January 26 against Josesito Lopez. Assuming Thurman wins, he and Pacquiao could easily substantiate a pay-per-view bout. The bout would likely generate a payday that Thurman would welcome gladly, and chances are he'd be a clear favorite to winassuming he looks decent against Lopez. Shawn Porter Of the three men on this list, Porter seems the most eager to fight Pacquiao. He was on hand on Saturday, and he named Pacquiao as one of the three fighters on his hitlist during an interview with Fight Hub. Porter is scheduled to defend his WBC title against Yordenis Ugas on March 9. If Porter can defeat the slick Cuban, he'll likely have a choice between Thurman and Pacquiao. A Pacquiao-Porter fight would be rugged and exciting. I'd favor Porter because of his physical strength and pursuit, but stylistically, it's a bout that should interest fight fans. Pacquiao's move to PBC has seemingly rejuvenated him and opened the door to more opponentseven if Mayweather refuses to play ball. | Manny Pacquiao easily beat Adrien Broner on Saturday night. He now wants a rematch with Floyd Mayweather Jr. | pegasus | 0 | https://www.forbes.com/sites/brianmazique/2019/01/20/whats-next-for-manny-pacquiao-after-beating-adrien-broner/ | 0.237923 |
What's Next For Manny Pacquiao After Beating Adrien Broner? | On Saturday night at the MGM Grand in Las Vegas, Manny Pacquiao didn't look like a future Hall of Famer who was too old to compete on an elite level. Pacquiao easily outfought Adrien Broner and retained his WBA "regular" title in the process with a unanimous-decision victory. Pay no attention to Broner's erroneous claims that he won the fight. Pacquiao outworked him and deserved the decision. After a decisive win, Pacquiao now wants a rematch with Floyd Mayweather Jr. and the massive paycheck that will come with the fight. Mayweather was on hand for Saturday's bout, but when Showtime's Jim Gray tried to corner him with inquiries about a rematch, Money wouldn't take the bait. With Mayweather non-committal, the 40-year-old Pacquiao won't be able to wait on him for long. While he looked the part of an ageless wonder on Saturday, the truth is he needs to stay active if he wants to remain elite. Fortunately for Pacquiao, he has signed with Premier Boxing Champions, and that should make negotiations with most of the top welterweights pretty simple. Here are the top options for Pacquiao if Mayweather won't come out of retirement for another mega fight. Danny Garcia The timelines don't align perfectly for Pacquiao and Garcia, but it seems like a makeable fight. Garcia is set to face the tough Adrian Granados on April 20. If he wins, which isn't a given, a Garcia-Pacquiao bout would be of some interest. Garcia doesn't have the biggest name in the welterweight division, but he's a former world champion and far from a total unknown. We'll have to see what the pay-per-view numbers were from Saturday's bout, but a Pacquiao-Garcia bout might be one best suited for Showtime. Keith Thurman Pacquiao and Thurman are on nearly identical timelines. Thurman makes his long-awaited return on January 26 against Josesito Lopez. Assuming Thurman wins, he and Pacquiao could easily substantiate a pay-per-view bout. The bout would likely generate a payday that Thurman would welcome gladly, and chances are he'd be a clear favorite to winassuming he looks decent against Lopez. Shawn Porter Of the three men on this list, Porter seems the most eager to fight Pacquiao. He was on hand on Saturday, and he named Pacquiao as one of the three fighters on his hitlist during an interview with Fight Hub. Porter is scheduled to defend his WBC title against Yordenis Ugas on March 9. If Porter can defeat the slick Cuban, he'll likely have a choice between Thurman and Pacquiao. A Pacquiao-Porter fight would be rugged and exciting. I'd favor Porter because of his physical strength and pursuit, but stylistically, it's a bout that should interest fight fans. Pacquiao's move to PBC has seemingly rejuvenated him and opened the door to more opponentseven if Mayweather refuses to play ball. | Manny Pacquiao easily beat Adrien Broner on Saturday night. He now wants a rematch with Floyd Mayweather Jr. With Mayweather non-committal, Pacquiao won't be able to wait on him for long. | pegasus | 1 | https://www.forbes.com/sites/brianmazique/2019/01/20/whats-next-for-manny-pacquiao-after-beating-adrien-broner/ | 0.343458 |
What's Next For Manny Pacquiao After Beating Adrien Broner? | On Saturday night at the MGM Grand in Las Vegas, Manny Pacquiao didn't look like a future Hall of Famer who was too old to compete on an elite level. Pacquiao easily outfought Adrien Broner and retained his WBA "regular" title in the process with a unanimous-decision victory. Pay no attention to Broner's erroneous claims that he won the fight. Pacquiao outworked him and deserved the decision. After a decisive win, Pacquiao now wants a rematch with Floyd Mayweather Jr. and the massive paycheck that will come with the fight. Mayweather was on hand for Saturday's bout, but when Showtime's Jim Gray tried to corner him with inquiries about a rematch, Money wouldn't take the bait. With Mayweather non-committal, the 40-year-old Pacquiao won't be able to wait on him for long. While he looked the part of an ageless wonder on Saturday, the truth is he needs to stay active if he wants to remain elite. Fortunately for Pacquiao, he has signed with Premier Boxing Champions, and that should make negotiations with most of the top welterweights pretty simple. Here are the top options for Pacquiao if Mayweather won't come out of retirement for another mega fight. Danny Garcia The timelines don't align perfectly for Pacquiao and Garcia, but it seems like a makeable fight. Garcia is set to face the tough Adrian Granados on April 20. If he wins, which isn't a given, a Garcia-Pacquiao bout would be of some interest. Garcia doesn't have the biggest name in the welterweight division, but he's a former world champion and far from a total unknown. We'll have to see what the pay-per-view numbers were from Saturday's bout, but a Pacquiao-Garcia bout might be one best suited for Showtime. Keith Thurman Pacquiao and Thurman are on nearly identical timelines. Thurman makes his long-awaited return on January 26 against Josesito Lopez. Assuming Thurman wins, he and Pacquiao could easily substantiate a pay-per-view bout. The bout would likely generate a payday that Thurman would welcome gladly, and chances are he'd be a clear favorite to winassuming he looks decent against Lopez. Shawn Porter Of the three men on this list, Porter seems the most eager to fight Pacquiao. He was on hand on Saturday, and he named Pacquiao as one of the three fighters on his hitlist during an interview with Fight Hub. Porter is scheduled to defend his WBC title against Yordenis Ugas on March 9. If Porter can defeat the slick Cuban, he'll likely have a choice between Thurman and Pacquiao. A Pacquiao-Porter fight would be rugged and exciting. I'd favor Porter because of his physical strength and pursuit, but stylistically, it's a bout that should interest fight fans. Pacquiao's move to PBC has seemingly rejuvenated him and opened the door to more opponentseven if Mayweather refuses to play ball. | Manny Pacquiao beat Adrien Broner on Saturday night in Las Vegas. Pacquiao now wants a rematch with Floyd Mayweather Jr. With Mayweather non-committal, Pacquiao won't be able to wait on him for long. Here are the top options for Pacquiao if Mayweather won't come out of retirement for another mega fight. | pegasus | 2 | https://www.forbes.com/sites/brianmazique/2019/01/20/whats-next-for-manny-pacquiao-after-beating-adrien-broner/ | 0.461497 |
Would Pfizer Shareholders Win With an Acquisition of Amarin? | January historically brings deals and rumors of deals in the biopharmaceutical industry. The first few weeks in 2019 haven't disappointed, with a couple of big buyouts already announced and rumors flying about more that could be on the way. Perhaps the juiciest gossip right now relates to a potential acquisition of Amarin (NASDAQ: AMRN) by Pfizer (NYSE: PFE). Nine days ago, StreetInsider.com reported that Pfizer could be looking to buy Amarin. Neither Amarin nor Pfizer made public comments about any discussions, but the story stirred interest among investors. Amarin's share price soared on the speculation about an acquisition. Pfizer's shares, on the other hand, fell. Woman drawing a big yellow fish on a wall with its mouth open behind a small yellow fish. More Image source: Getty Images. Arguments against a deal Probably the biggest argument against Pfizer buying Amarin is that the drugmaker really doesn't have to make a deal right now. Pfizer's pipeline is as strong as it's been in a long time. The company's top products, including blood thinner Eliquis and breast cancer drug Ibrance, continue to generate solid sales growth. There's also the fact that Pfizer's track record of acquisitions has been spotty. For example, the big pharma company made two significant acquisitions in 2016, spending $14 billion to buy Medivation and $5.2 billion to buy Anacor. Based on sales so far for the key drugs obtained with both of those transactions, it will take years for Pfizer to see a positive return on its initial investments. Many Pfizer shareholders would probably prefer that the company use its cash to boost its dividend more and buy back more shares. Actually, new Pfizer CEO Albert Bourla said at the J.P. Morgan Healthcare Conference earlier this month that his top capital allocation priorities are to do those two things -- increase the dividend and repurchase shares. Another argument against Pfizer acquiring Anacor is that it could get more bang for the buck by buying or licensing phase 2 or phase 3 assets. Again, that's something that Bourla indicated the drugmaker would do in his comments at the J.P. Morgan conference. Checking off the boxes However, there are several reasons why an acquisition of Amarin by Pfizer could pay off nicely. Amarin definitely has a potential blockbuster on its hands with Vascepa. At least one analyst thinks that Vascepa could achieve peak sales in the ballpark of $2.5 billion. If the drug can get anywhere close to that level, Amarin's current market cap of $5.3 billion looks quite attractive. Adding Vascepa to Pfizer's lineup would increase the chances that the drug can deliver on its potential. Pfizer already has a large sales force calling on cardiologists to promote Eliquis, cholesterol drug Lipitor, and hypertension drug Norvasc. Vascepa would be a good fit with Pfizer's existing drugs. Albert Bourla said in his comments at the J.P. Morgan conference that Pfizer doesn't want any deals that are distracting. An acquisition of Amarin shouldn't be a distraction. Pfizer's cash stockpile (including cash, cash equivalents, and short-term investments) totals more than $17 billion. The drugmaker could buy Amarin at a reasonable premium to its current price without breaking a sweat. | Amarin's share price soared on speculation about an acquisition by Pfizer. | pegasus | 0 | https://news.yahoo.com/pfizer-shareholders-win-acquisition-amarin-141500651.html | 0.119991 |
Would Pfizer Shareholders Win With an Acquisition of Amarin? | January historically brings deals and rumors of deals in the biopharmaceutical industry. The first few weeks in 2019 haven't disappointed, with a couple of big buyouts already announced and rumors flying about more that could be on the way. Perhaps the juiciest gossip right now relates to a potential acquisition of Amarin (NASDAQ: AMRN) by Pfizer (NYSE: PFE). Nine days ago, StreetInsider.com reported that Pfizer could be looking to buy Amarin. Neither Amarin nor Pfizer made public comments about any discussions, but the story stirred interest among investors. Amarin's share price soared on the speculation about an acquisition. Pfizer's shares, on the other hand, fell. Woman drawing a big yellow fish on a wall with its mouth open behind a small yellow fish. More Image source: Getty Images. Arguments against a deal Probably the biggest argument against Pfizer buying Amarin is that the drugmaker really doesn't have to make a deal right now. Pfizer's pipeline is as strong as it's been in a long time. The company's top products, including blood thinner Eliquis and breast cancer drug Ibrance, continue to generate solid sales growth. There's also the fact that Pfizer's track record of acquisitions has been spotty. For example, the big pharma company made two significant acquisitions in 2016, spending $14 billion to buy Medivation and $5.2 billion to buy Anacor. Based on sales so far for the key drugs obtained with both of those transactions, it will take years for Pfizer to see a positive return on its initial investments. Many Pfizer shareholders would probably prefer that the company use its cash to boost its dividend more and buy back more shares. Actually, new Pfizer CEO Albert Bourla said at the J.P. Morgan Healthcare Conference earlier this month that his top capital allocation priorities are to do those two things -- increase the dividend and repurchase shares. Another argument against Pfizer acquiring Anacor is that it could get more bang for the buck by buying or licensing phase 2 or phase 3 assets. Again, that's something that Bourla indicated the drugmaker would do in his comments at the J.P. Morgan conference. Checking off the boxes However, there are several reasons why an acquisition of Amarin by Pfizer could pay off nicely. Amarin definitely has a potential blockbuster on its hands with Vascepa. At least one analyst thinks that Vascepa could achieve peak sales in the ballpark of $2.5 billion. If the drug can get anywhere close to that level, Amarin's current market cap of $5.3 billion looks quite attractive. Adding Vascepa to Pfizer's lineup would increase the chances that the drug can deliver on its potential. Pfizer already has a large sales force calling on cardiologists to promote Eliquis, cholesterol drug Lipitor, and hypertension drug Norvasc. Vascepa would be a good fit with Pfizer's existing drugs. Albert Bourla said in his comments at the J.P. Morgan conference that Pfizer doesn't want any deals that are distracting. An acquisition of Amarin shouldn't be a distraction. Pfizer's cash stockpile (including cash, cash equivalents, and short-term investments) totals more than $17 billion. The drugmaker could buy Amarin at a reasonable premium to its current price without breaking a sweat. | Amarin's share price soared on speculation about an acquisition by Pfizer. Pfizer's pipeline is as strong as it's been in a long time. Pfizer's track record of acquisitions has been spotty. | pegasus | 1 | https://news.yahoo.com/pfizer-shareholders-win-acquisition-amarin-141500651.html | 0.102153 |
Would Pfizer Shareholders Win With an Acquisition of Amarin? | January historically brings deals and rumors of deals in the biopharmaceutical industry. The first few weeks in 2019 haven't disappointed, with a couple of big buyouts already announced and rumors flying about more that could be on the way. Perhaps the juiciest gossip right now relates to a potential acquisition of Amarin (NASDAQ: AMRN) by Pfizer (NYSE: PFE). Nine days ago, StreetInsider.com reported that Pfizer could be looking to buy Amarin. Neither Amarin nor Pfizer made public comments about any discussions, but the story stirred interest among investors. Amarin's share price soared on the speculation about an acquisition. Pfizer's shares, on the other hand, fell. Woman drawing a big yellow fish on a wall with its mouth open behind a small yellow fish. More Image source: Getty Images. Arguments against a deal Probably the biggest argument against Pfizer buying Amarin is that the drugmaker really doesn't have to make a deal right now. Pfizer's pipeline is as strong as it's been in a long time. The company's top products, including blood thinner Eliquis and breast cancer drug Ibrance, continue to generate solid sales growth. There's also the fact that Pfizer's track record of acquisitions has been spotty. For example, the big pharma company made two significant acquisitions in 2016, spending $14 billion to buy Medivation and $5.2 billion to buy Anacor. Based on sales so far for the key drugs obtained with both of those transactions, it will take years for Pfizer to see a positive return on its initial investments. Many Pfizer shareholders would probably prefer that the company use its cash to boost its dividend more and buy back more shares. Actually, new Pfizer CEO Albert Bourla said at the J.P. Morgan Healthcare Conference earlier this month that his top capital allocation priorities are to do those two things -- increase the dividend and repurchase shares. Another argument against Pfizer acquiring Anacor is that it could get more bang for the buck by buying or licensing phase 2 or phase 3 assets. Again, that's something that Bourla indicated the drugmaker would do in his comments at the J.P. Morgan conference. Checking off the boxes However, there are several reasons why an acquisition of Amarin by Pfizer could pay off nicely. Amarin definitely has a potential blockbuster on its hands with Vascepa. At least one analyst thinks that Vascepa could achieve peak sales in the ballpark of $2.5 billion. If the drug can get anywhere close to that level, Amarin's current market cap of $5.3 billion looks quite attractive. Adding Vascepa to Pfizer's lineup would increase the chances that the drug can deliver on its potential. Pfizer already has a large sales force calling on cardiologists to promote Eliquis, cholesterol drug Lipitor, and hypertension drug Norvasc. Vascepa would be a good fit with Pfizer's existing drugs. Albert Bourla said in his comments at the J.P. Morgan conference that Pfizer doesn't want any deals that are distracting. An acquisition of Amarin shouldn't be a distraction. Pfizer's cash stockpile (including cash, cash equivalents, and short-term investments) totals more than $17 billion. The drugmaker could buy Amarin at a reasonable premium to its current price without breaking a sweat. | Amarin's share price soared on speculation about an acquisition by Pfizer. Pfizer's top products, including blood thinner Eliquis and breast cancer drug Ibrance, continue to generate solid sales growth. Pfizer's track record of acquisitions has been spotty. An acquisition of Amarin by Pfizer could pay off nicely. | pegasus | 2 | https://news.yahoo.com/pfizer-shareholders-win-acquisition-amarin-141500651.html | 0.351547 |
Whats The Difference Between Trumps Immigration Compromise And a Communist Police State? | Donald Trumps big announcement Saturday wouldnt be the first time the word compromise was used as a euphemism for the government. Stealing even more of your money to pay for both big corporate political parties wish lists and all their friends and corporate sponsors. The big compromise is: Donald Trump gets to spend five billion dollars of not-his-money, on none-of-his-business, to solve not-the-taxpayers-problem. And in exchange for that, he will give the DACA kids, and other immigrants who have temporary protected status by the federal government, a 3-year extension. Not to come swooping into their school where theyre studying, or some place where theyre working, with a group of armed police, to arrest them and confine them like you would the most violent criminal, and then transport them to some other country far away from their home and drop them off. Give me your money, or Ill take some police state measures on a broad group of people who arent hurting or threatening anybody. U.S. immigration policy is exactly how the Soviet Union treated immigrants by the way. In a paper for Law & Social Inquiry, the Journal of The American Bar Foundation (Spring 2012), Matthew A. So from the communist point of view, the government should intervene in, control, and bureaucratize every aspect of humanity. Whether its the number of workers in a certain industry (like when Mao Zedong forced so many Chinese farmers to go into steel production that the resulting famine killed 15 million people), or how many immigrants should be living in an area, communists want the bureau to decide. Thats why one of the Ten Planks of Communism in Karl Marxs Communist Manifesto is: 4. Confiscation of the property of all emigrants and rebels. For the communist ideologue, the states prerogative to advance its agenda was the supreme consideration in a communist society, so no individual claim to fair treatment, or substantive due process, or liberty could be made against it. Thats why communisms a nightmare. If you dont feel safe, thats what the Second Amendments for; its not Washingtons problem. This idea that America is all one house and your own house has four walls, so why shouldnt America have a wall?that is communist thinking. This is not all one house. Nearly everybody has their own home inside of walls that they are paying for. Individuals should be responsible for their own walls and for their own personal safety. Thats what we have the Second Amendment for. In America, youre allowed to take whatever measures you need to keep yourself safe, and thats guaranteed by the Second Amendment, and that guarantee has been upheld very firmly and even heavily strengthened in multiple Supreme Court decisions over the last decade. So you are allowed to be armed to a degree in America that half the people here think it is insane, but I disagree with them vehemently. I think it would be insane in a world like ours not to allow people to be able to defend themselves. | In a communist society, the state should intervene in, control, and bureaucratize every aspect of humanity. In America, you're allowed to take whatever measures you need to keep yourself safe, and thats guaranteed by the Second Amendment. | ctrlsum | 1 | https://news.yahoo.com/difference-between-trump-immigration-compromise-141803196.html | 0.102418 |
Will NBA prospect Ja Morant from Murray State struggle against Belmont again? | Murray State's Ja Morant may be the first guard taken in the 2019 NBA Draft. Some draft boards have the 6-foot-3 sophomore rated ahead of other top prospects such as Vanderbilt's Darius Garland, Duke's R.J. Barrett and Kentucky's Keldon Johnson. You couldn't tell it, however, by the way Morant played in a game at Belmont last season. Murray State guard Ja Morant (12) works around Auburn guard Bryce Brown (2) during the first half of an NCAA college basketball game, Saturday, Dec. 22, 2018, in Auburn, Ala. (AP Photo/Vasha Hunt) (Photo: The Associated Press) The Bruins held Morant to eight points and three assists and beat the Racers 79-72 at Curb Event Center. The Bruins will try to stymie Morant again Thursday (ESPNU, 8 p.m.) when they visit Murray State (14-2, 5-0) in a key Ohio Valley Conference showdown. Belmont warmed up for the challenge by beating Tennessee State last Saturday 92-74. The Bruins (13-4, 4-2) staged their best offensive performance of the season shooting 63.5 percent (33 of 52) from the field and 61.9 percent (13 of 21) from 3-point range. They were 73.9 percent (17 of 23) from the field in the second half. Coach Rick Byrd hopes Belmont plays as well offensively against Murray State this week as the Bruins did in Saturday's 92-74 win over Tennessee State. (Photo: Sam Simpkins / Belmont) "Belmont played an amazing game," first-year TSU coach Brian "Penny" Collins said. "I didn't even know they missed five shots (in the second half); I literally thought they made every shot they took. That's how it felt." Morant then and now With Belmont now focused on Murray State, Bruins coach Rick Byrd recalled how his team held Morant in check in the regular season last year. Morant played better in the OVC tournament championship, which Murray State won 68-51. He scored 15 points in that game, but was only 4-of-13 from the field. Morant is averaging 24.3 points this season. He scored 40 points, dished out 11 assists and had five steals Saturday in an 82-72 win over Southern Illinois-Edwardsville. He set an OVC record by making 21-of-21 free throws. "Morant's interesting because a year ago he played third fiddle to their best two players (Jonathan Stark and Terrell Miller Jr.)," Byrd said. "We really kind of went under ball screens and didn't feel like he could make shots good enough for us to worry too much about him. And now he's going to be a top three or four pick in the NBA Draft." Belmont's Nick Muszynski had 23 points and four blacks in Saturday's 92-74 win over Tennessee State at Curb Event Center. (Photo: Sam Simpkins / Belmont) Dylan Windler led Belmont in the win over TSU with 25 points. He was 7-of-8 on 3-pointers. Nick Muszynski scored 23 points. Winlder and Muszynski were a combined 17-of-21 from the field. "We're hopeful we can carry over that type of shooting (to the Murray State game)," said Windler, who averages 18.9 points per game. "We built our confidence up and carried it over into the second half of (the TSU) game. Hopefully, we can take that confidence into practice these next couple of days." Not that far away Tennessee State coach Brian "Penny" Collins said the Tigers are close to being on the same level as Belmont. (Photo: Sam Simpkins / Belmont) TSU never really threatened Belmont. After falling behind 43-31 at the half, the closes the Tigers got in the second half came when Donte Fitzpatrick-Dorsey hit a 3-pointer to cut the Belmont lead to 54-44. Belmont promptly answered by going on a 10-2 run and it was never close again. TSU fell to 5-13 and 2-4, but Collins said he firmly believes the Tigers are capable of being competing with the Bruins. "I wanted our guys to see that we're really not that far away from being the type of team that Belmont is," Collins said. "And we're going to get there. We're just trying to get there quicker than (the players) think; I want them to be there now, and they can be." TSU plays at Austin Peay Thursday (8 p.m.). More: Belmont bounces back from loss with win over Tennessee State More: Nashville's Penny: Collins has grand plan for TSU Tigers Reach Mike Organ at 615-259-8021 or on Twitter @MikeOrganWriter. | Murray State's Ja Morant may be the first guard taken in the 2019 NBA Draft. The Bruins held Morant to eight points and three assists in a game at Belmont last season. | ctrlsum | 1 | https://www.tennessean.com/story/sports/2019/01/20/ja-morant-murray-state-nba-prospect-against-belmont-dylan-windler-rick-byrd/2630114002/ | 0.406818 |
Will NBA prospect Ja Morant from Murray State struggle against Belmont again? | Murray State's Ja Morant may be the first guard taken in the 2019 NBA Draft. Some draft boards have the 6-foot-3 sophomore rated ahead of other top prospects such as Vanderbilt's Darius Garland, Duke's R.J. Barrett and Kentucky's Keldon Johnson. You couldn't tell it, however, by the way Morant played in a game at Belmont last season. Murray State guard Ja Morant (12) works around Auburn guard Bryce Brown (2) during the first half of an NCAA college basketball game, Saturday, Dec. 22, 2018, in Auburn, Ala. (AP Photo/Vasha Hunt) (Photo: The Associated Press) The Bruins held Morant to eight points and three assists and beat the Racers 79-72 at Curb Event Center. The Bruins will try to stymie Morant again Thursday (ESPNU, 8 p.m.) when they visit Murray State (14-2, 5-0) in a key Ohio Valley Conference showdown. Belmont warmed up for the challenge by beating Tennessee State last Saturday 92-74. The Bruins (13-4, 4-2) staged their best offensive performance of the season shooting 63.5 percent (33 of 52) from the field and 61.9 percent (13 of 21) from 3-point range. They were 73.9 percent (17 of 23) from the field in the second half. Coach Rick Byrd hopes Belmont plays as well offensively against Murray State this week as the Bruins did in Saturday's 92-74 win over Tennessee State. (Photo: Sam Simpkins / Belmont) "Belmont played an amazing game," first-year TSU coach Brian "Penny" Collins said. "I didn't even know they missed five shots (in the second half); I literally thought they made every shot they took. That's how it felt." Morant then and now With Belmont now focused on Murray State, Bruins coach Rick Byrd recalled how his team held Morant in check in the regular season last year. Morant played better in the OVC tournament championship, which Murray State won 68-51. He scored 15 points in that game, but was only 4-of-13 from the field. Morant is averaging 24.3 points this season. He scored 40 points, dished out 11 assists and had five steals Saturday in an 82-72 win over Southern Illinois-Edwardsville. He set an OVC record by making 21-of-21 free throws. "Morant's interesting because a year ago he played third fiddle to their best two players (Jonathan Stark and Terrell Miller Jr.)," Byrd said. "We really kind of went under ball screens and didn't feel like he could make shots good enough for us to worry too much about him. And now he's going to be a top three or four pick in the NBA Draft." Belmont's Nick Muszynski had 23 points and four blacks in Saturday's 92-74 win over Tennessee State at Curb Event Center. (Photo: Sam Simpkins / Belmont) Dylan Windler led Belmont in the win over TSU with 25 points. He was 7-of-8 on 3-pointers. Nick Muszynski scored 23 points. Winlder and Muszynski were a combined 17-of-21 from the field. "We're hopeful we can carry over that type of shooting (to the Murray State game)," said Windler, who averages 18.9 points per game. "We built our confidence up and carried it over into the second half of (the TSU) game. Hopefully, we can take that confidence into practice these next couple of days." Not that far away Tennessee State coach Brian "Penny" Collins said the Tigers are close to being on the same level as Belmont. (Photo: Sam Simpkins / Belmont) TSU never really threatened Belmont. After falling behind 43-31 at the half, the closes the Tigers got in the second half came when Donte Fitzpatrick-Dorsey hit a 3-pointer to cut the Belmont lead to 54-44. Belmont promptly answered by going on a 10-2 run and it was never close again. TSU fell to 5-13 and 2-4, but Collins said he firmly believes the Tigers are capable of being competing with the Bruins. "I wanted our guys to see that we're really not that far away from being the type of team that Belmont is," Collins said. "And we're going to get there. We're just trying to get there quicker than (the players) think; I want them to be there now, and they can be." TSU plays at Austin Peay Thursday (8 p.m.). More: Belmont bounces back from loss with win over Tennessee State More: Nashville's Penny: Collins has grand plan for TSU Tigers Reach Mike Organ at 615-259-8021 or on Twitter @MikeOrganWriter. | Murray State's Ja Morant may be the first guard taken in the 2019 NBA Draft. Belmont held Morant to eight points and three assists last season. The Bruins will try to stymie Morant again Thursday. Belmont warmed up for the challenge by beating Tennessee State last Saturday 92-74. | pegasus | 2 | https://www.tennessean.com/story/sports/2019/01/20/ja-morant-murray-state-nba-prospect-against-belmont-dylan-windler-rick-byrd/2630114002/ | 0.466297 |
Whats open and closed on MLK Day in the Sacramento region? | Martin Luther King Jr. Day, a time to honor and remember the civil rights leader, will happen Monday, Jan 21, this year. Several government offices and businesses will be closed; look through our list to see what will be open or closed in memory of King. Government institutions All federal offices will be closed on Monday, as will state offices, including the Department of Motor Vehicles. County offices in Sacramento, Placer, El Dorado and Yolo County will be closed. Digital Access for only $0.99 For the most comprehensive local coverage, subscribe today. Post offices will be closed on Jan. 21 in observance of the holiday, and mail service will begin the following Tuesday; private services like UPS and DHL will be operating as normal. FedEx services will see some changes. Recreational facilities National parks across the country are offering free entrance on MLK day, but with a shutdown still in effect, this may be changed or altered. Park services are already limited during the shutdown, The Sacramento Bees reporting shows. Californias State parks will be open on Jan. 21, but some museums will be closed. Check with the location you plan on visiting for more details and information. Public parks will be open. Public golf courses will also be open. Those include Bing Maloney, Cavanaugh, William Land, Haggin Oaks, and Bartley. Private courses should also be open, but call ahead to the one you plan on visiting to be sure. Educational institutions K-12 public schools in the region are will be closed Monday. The Los Rios Community College District schools Sacramento City, American River and Cosumnes River will be closed. UC Davis and Sacramento State will be closed. Public libraries in Sacramento, Placer, Yolo and El Dorado County will be closed. Financial institutions Most banks like Golden 1 Credit Union, Chase, Bank of America, Citibank, Bank of the West and others will be closed on MLK Day. If you need assist, check with your bank to see if its online services will be available on the day. The major stock exchanges NYSE, Nasdaq and American exchanges will be closed. Community services Garbage pickups, that includes recyclables and yard waste, for curbside customers in Sacramento, Citrus Heights, Elk Grove and Folsom wont see a delay in pickup. Waste Management from Sacramento County will be operating as normal as well. Transfer stations and public landfills like Kiefer Landfill near Sloughhouse, Yolo County Central Landfill, and El Dorado Disposal will all be open. All emergency services including hospitals will be open. Transit and traffic The city of Sacramento will offer free meters on Jan. 21 in honor of the celebration, its website said. Sacramento RT will be operating on its holiday/Sunday schedule on MLK day. Amtrak lines like the Capitol Corridor will be on a normal schedule, according to its website. Caltrain lines will also be in service. BART and ACE trains will be on a holiday schedule Monday, so check their pages for more information about your specific route. The Tahoe Truckee Area Regional Transit (TART) is still on its winter schedule and will remain so until April 8 of this year. Commuter buses will not be operating on Jan 21 for Roseville Transit, but local, ADA, and Dial-A-Ride services will still be available. Its website said that holiday schedules can change, call 916-745-7560 for more info. Yolobus and Lincoln Transit routes will be in service on MLK day, their sites say. South County Transit, Elk Grove E-tran, and Delta Breeze buses will not be operating on Jan 21. The same is true for Placer Commuter Express and El Dorado Transit. | Martin Luther King Jr. Day will be Monday, Jan 21, this year. Several government offices and businesses will be closed. Public parks will be open, and some golf courses will also be open. The city of Sacramento will offer free meters. | bart | 1 | https://www.sacbee.com/entertainment/holidays/article223956470.html | 0.605392 |
Whats open and closed on MLK Day in the Sacramento region? | Martin Luther King Jr. Day, a time to honor and remember the civil rights leader, will happen Monday, Jan 21, this year. Several government offices and businesses will be closed; look through our list to see what will be open or closed in memory of King. Government institutions All federal offices will be closed on Monday, as will state offices, including the Department of Motor Vehicles. County offices in Sacramento, Placer, El Dorado and Yolo County will be closed. Digital Access for only $0.99 For the most comprehensive local coverage, subscribe today. Post offices will be closed on Jan. 21 in observance of the holiday, and mail service will begin the following Tuesday; private services like UPS and DHL will be operating as normal. FedEx services will see some changes. Recreational facilities National parks across the country are offering free entrance on MLK day, but with a shutdown still in effect, this may be changed or altered. Park services are already limited during the shutdown, The Sacramento Bees reporting shows. Californias State parks will be open on Jan. 21, but some museums will be closed. Check with the location you plan on visiting for more details and information. Public parks will be open. Public golf courses will also be open. Those include Bing Maloney, Cavanaugh, William Land, Haggin Oaks, and Bartley. Private courses should also be open, but call ahead to the one you plan on visiting to be sure. Educational institutions K-12 public schools in the region are will be closed Monday. The Los Rios Community College District schools Sacramento City, American River and Cosumnes River will be closed. UC Davis and Sacramento State will be closed. Public libraries in Sacramento, Placer, Yolo and El Dorado County will be closed. Financial institutions Most banks like Golden 1 Credit Union, Chase, Bank of America, Citibank, Bank of the West and others will be closed on MLK Day. If you need assist, check with your bank to see if its online services will be available on the day. The major stock exchanges NYSE, Nasdaq and American exchanges will be closed. Community services Garbage pickups, that includes recyclables and yard waste, for curbside customers in Sacramento, Citrus Heights, Elk Grove and Folsom wont see a delay in pickup. Waste Management from Sacramento County will be operating as normal as well. Transfer stations and public landfills like Kiefer Landfill near Sloughhouse, Yolo County Central Landfill, and El Dorado Disposal will all be open. All emergency services including hospitals will be open. Transit and traffic The city of Sacramento will offer free meters on Jan. 21 in honor of the celebration, its website said. Sacramento RT will be operating on its holiday/Sunday schedule on MLK day. Amtrak lines like the Capitol Corridor will be on a normal schedule, according to its website. Caltrain lines will also be in service. BART and ACE trains will be on a holiday schedule Monday, so check their pages for more information about your specific route. The Tahoe Truckee Area Regional Transit (TART) is still on its winter schedule and will remain so until April 8 of this year. Commuter buses will not be operating on Jan 21 for Roseville Transit, but local, ADA, and Dial-A-Ride services will still be available. Its website said that holiday schedules can change, call 916-745-7560 for more info. Yolobus and Lincoln Transit routes will be in service on MLK day, their sites say. South County Transit, Elk Grove E-tran, and Delta Breeze buses will not be operating on Jan 21. The same is true for Placer Commuter Express and El Dorado Transit. | All federal offices will be closed on MLK Day, as will state offices, including the Department of Motor Vehicles. Public parks will be open, but some museums will also be closed, according to The Sacramento Bee's reporting. Public libraries in Sacramento, Placer, Yolo and El Dorado County will beclosed. | ctrlsum | 2 | https://www.sacbee.com/entertainment/holidays/article223956470.html | 0.682705 |
When Did the Rams Move to Los Angeles? | The Rams relocated back to Los Angeles from St. Louis in 2016, when owner Stan Kroenke received approval from 30 of 32 NFL owners for his ambitious plan to move his team to California, where a new multi-billion dollar stadium would be built for the franchise. Kroenke paid a $550 million fee in 2016 to move the team. The Rams franchise was founded in 1936 in Cleveland, but moved to Los Angeles 10 years later, where the team remained for almost five decades. The Rams were based in the Los Angeles area from 1946 to 1994 before they relocated to St. Louis from 1995-2015. The Raiders also played in Los Angeles from 1982 to 1994 before moving to Oakland. There was a 21-year NFL absence from Los Angeles, the nation's second-largest media market, following both team's departures in the mid-1990s. While the Rams have played in the Los Angeles Memorial Coliseum since returning to the City of Angels in 2016it's where they played between 1946 and 1979 before spending 14 seasons in Anaheimthe franchise will relocate to the new LA Stadium, which is currently under construction, once it is finished in the summer of 2020. The facility was originally supposed to be ready in time for the 2019 season but construction was delayed by an unusually rainy winter after breaking ground. The San Diego Chargers joined the Rams in Los Angeles and will share the new facility come 2020. | The Rams relocated back to Los Angeles from St. Louis in 2016. | ctrlsum | 0 | https://www.si.com/nfl/2019/01/20/when-did-rams-move-los-angeles-franchise-history-locations | 0.35286 |
When Did the Rams Move to Los Angeles? | The Rams relocated back to Los Angeles from St. Louis in 2016, when owner Stan Kroenke received approval from 30 of 32 NFL owners for his ambitious plan to move his team to California, where a new multi-billion dollar stadium would be built for the franchise. Kroenke paid a $550 million fee in 2016 to move the team. The Rams franchise was founded in 1936 in Cleveland, but moved to Los Angeles 10 years later, where the team remained for almost five decades. The Rams were based in the Los Angeles area from 1946 to 1994 before they relocated to St. Louis from 1995-2015. The Raiders also played in Los Angeles from 1982 to 1994 before moving to Oakland. There was a 21-year NFL absence from Los Angeles, the nation's second-largest media market, following both team's departures in the mid-1990s. While the Rams have played in the Los Angeles Memorial Coliseum since returning to the City of Angels in 2016it's where they played between 1946 and 1979 before spending 14 seasons in Anaheimthe franchise will relocate to the new LA Stadium, which is currently under construction, once it is finished in the summer of 2020. The facility was originally supposed to be ready in time for the 2019 season but construction was delayed by an unusually rainy winter after breaking ground. The San Diego Chargers joined the Rams in Los Angeles and will share the new facility come 2020. | The Rams moved back to Los Angeles in 2016 after a 21-year absence from the city. The Rams have played in the Los Angeles Memorial Coliseum since returning to the City of Angels in 2016. | ctrlsum | 1 | https://www.si.com/nfl/2019/01/20/when-did-rams-move-los-angeles-franchise-history-locations | 0.553275 |
When Did the Rams Move to Los Angeles? | The Rams relocated back to Los Angeles from St. Louis in 2016, when owner Stan Kroenke received approval from 30 of 32 NFL owners for his ambitious plan to move his team to California, where a new multi-billion dollar stadium would be built for the franchise. Kroenke paid a $550 million fee in 2016 to move the team. The Rams franchise was founded in 1936 in Cleveland, but moved to Los Angeles 10 years later, where the team remained for almost five decades. The Rams were based in the Los Angeles area from 1946 to 1994 before they relocated to St. Louis from 1995-2015. The Raiders also played in Los Angeles from 1982 to 1994 before moving to Oakland. There was a 21-year NFL absence from Los Angeles, the nation's second-largest media market, following both team's departures in the mid-1990s. While the Rams have played in the Los Angeles Memorial Coliseum since returning to the City of Angels in 2016it's where they played between 1946 and 1979 before spending 14 seasons in Anaheimthe franchise will relocate to the new LA Stadium, which is currently under construction, once it is finished in the summer of 2020. The facility was originally supposed to be ready in time for the 2019 season but construction was delayed by an unusually rainy winter after breaking ground. The San Diego Chargers joined the Rams in Los Angeles and will share the new facility come 2020. | The Rams franchise was founded in 1936 in Cleveland, but moved to Los Angeles 10 years later. The Rams were based in the Los Angeles area from 1946 to 1994 before they relocated to St. Louis from 1995-2015. The franchise will relocate to the new LA Stadium, which is currently under construction, once it is finished in the summer of 2020. | bart | 2 | https://www.si.com/nfl/2019/01/20/when-did-rams-move-los-angeles-franchise-history-locations | 0.460501 |
When is the Last Time the Saints Lost a Home Playoff Game? | The New Orleans Saints have played 10 home playoff games at Mercedes-Benz Superdome, but they haven't lost one since Jan. 3, 1993, when the Eagles posted a 26-point turnaround in an 8.5 minute span during the fouth quarter to defeat the Saints, 3620, at home in the wild-card round. Twenty-six years later, the Eagles' 26 points remains the most ever scored in the fourth quarter of an NFL postseason game. Saints quarterback Drew Brees is 86 all time in the postseason, but improved to 60 in playoff games at home after New Orleans extended the impressive streak last weekend with a 2014 divisional round win over the Eagles in the Superdome on Sunday, Jan. 13. The Saints' last road postseason loss came in 2017, when they fell to the Vikings in Minneapolis in the divisional round. The home winning streak will be tested once again this weekend, when the Saints host the Los Angeles Rams in the NFC Championship game. Kickoff is set for 3:05 p.m. ET from New Orleans on Sunday, Jan. 20. | The Saints haven't lost a home playoff game since Jan. 3, 1993. | ctrlsum | 0 | https://www.si.com/nfl/2019/01/20/new-orleans-saints-last-home-playoff-loss-nfl-postseason | 0.616005 |
When is the Last Time the Saints Lost a Home Playoff Game? | The New Orleans Saints have played 10 home playoff games at Mercedes-Benz Superdome, but they haven't lost one since Jan. 3, 1993, when the Eagles posted a 26-point turnaround in an 8.5 minute span during the fouth quarter to defeat the Saints, 3620, at home in the wild-card round. Twenty-six years later, the Eagles' 26 points remains the most ever scored in the fourth quarter of an NFL postseason game. Saints quarterback Drew Brees is 86 all time in the postseason, but improved to 60 in playoff games at home after New Orleans extended the impressive streak last weekend with a 2014 divisional round win over the Eagles in the Superdome on Sunday, Jan. 13. The Saints' last road postseason loss came in 2017, when they fell to the Vikings in Minneapolis in the divisional round. The home winning streak will be tested once again this weekend, when the Saints host the Los Angeles Rams in the NFC Championship game. Kickoff is set for 3:05 p.m. ET from New Orleans on Sunday, Jan. 20. | The New Orleans Saints haven't lost a home playoff game since Jan. 3, 1993. The Saints' last road postseason loss came in 2017, when they fell to the Vikings in Minneapolis. | ctrlsum | 1 | https://www.si.com/nfl/2019/01/20/new-orleans-saints-last-home-playoff-loss-nfl-postseason | 0.69301 |
When is the Last Time the Saints Lost a Home Playoff Game? | The New Orleans Saints have played 10 home playoff games at Mercedes-Benz Superdome, but they haven't lost one since Jan. 3, 1993, when the Eagles posted a 26-point turnaround in an 8.5 minute span during the fouth quarter to defeat the Saints, 3620, at home in the wild-card round. Twenty-six years later, the Eagles' 26 points remains the most ever scored in the fourth quarter of an NFL postseason game. Saints quarterback Drew Brees is 86 all time in the postseason, but improved to 60 in playoff games at home after New Orleans extended the impressive streak last weekend with a 2014 divisional round win over the Eagles in the Superdome on Sunday, Jan. 13. The Saints' last road postseason loss came in 2017, when they fell to the Vikings in Minneapolis in the divisional round. The home winning streak will be tested once again this weekend, when the Saints host the Los Angeles Rams in the NFC Championship game. Kickoff is set for 3:05 p.m. ET from New Orleans on Sunday, Jan. 20. | The New Orleans Saints haven't lost a home playoff game since Jan. 3, 1993. The Saints' last road postseason loss came in 2017, when they fell to the Vikings in Minneapolis in the divisional round. The home winning streak will be tested once again this weekend, when the Saints host the Los Angeles Rams. | ctrlsum | 2 | https://www.si.com/nfl/2019/01/20/new-orleans-saints-last-home-playoff-loss-nfl-postseason | 0.742746 |
Why do the Saints have TB patches on their jerseys? | The Saints have worn jersey patches and helmet decals bearing the initials "TB" on their jerseys this season. The "TB" honors former owner Tom Benson, who died in March at age 90. Both the decal and patch feature a silhouette of Benson holding a Saints umbrella atop the letters "TB." Benson owned the Saints from 1985 until his death. His widow, Gayle, now owns the franchise in addition to the New Orleans Pelicans. After a first-round bye, the Saints beat the Eagles in the NFC Divisional Round to reach the NFC Championship. The Saints will face the Rams on Sunday in New Orleans for the chance to go to Super Bowl LIII. Kickoff from the Mercedes-Benz Superdome is set for 3:05 p.m. ET. | The Saints have worn jersey patches and helmet decals bearing the initials "TB" on their jerseys this season. The " TB" honors former owner Tom Benson, who died in March at age 90. Benson owned the Saints from 1985 until his death. | bart | 1 | https://www.si.com/nfl/2019/01/20/saints-tb-jersey-patch-helmet-decal-tom-benson | 0.446735 |
Why do the Saints have TB patches on their jerseys? | The Saints have worn jersey patches and helmet decals bearing the initials "TB" on their jerseys this season. The "TB" honors former owner Tom Benson, who died in March at age 90. Both the decal and patch feature a silhouette of Benson holding a Saints umbrella atop the letters "TB." Benson owned the Saints from 1985 until his death. His widow, Gayle, now owns the franchise in addition to the New Orleans Pelicans. After a first-round bye, the Saints beat the Eagles in the NFC Divisional Round to reach the NFC Championship. The Saints will face the Rams on Sunday in New Orleans for the chance to go to Super Bowl LIII. Kickoff from the Mercedes-Benz Superdome is set for 3:05 p.m. ET. | The Saints have worn jersey patches and helmet decals bearing the initials "TB" on their jerseys this season. The " TB" honors former owner Tom Benson, who died in March at age 90. The Saints will face the Rams on Sunday in New Orleans for the chance to go to Super Bowl LIII. | bart | 2 | https://www.si.com/nfl/2019/01/20/saints-tb-jersey-patch-helmet-decal-tom-benson | 0.470892 |
Has a Conference Championship ever gone to overtime? | Six conference championships have gone into overtime during the NFL playoffs, with five of those overtime games coming in NFC clashes. The 2014 NFC Championship between the Packers and Seahawks was the most recent championship game to need extra time. The two teams went into overtime at CenturyLink Field in Seattle, Wash., after wrapping up regulation tied at 22 points apiece. The Seahawks secured the win with an overtime touchdown for six points. Seattle went into the Super Bowl with a 2822 conference championship win under its belt. The NFC championship also went into overtime during the 2011 playoffs, with the Giants defeating the 49ers by three, 2017, after an overtime field goal on Jan. 22, 2012.The 2009, 2007 and 1998 NFC championship games also went to overtime. The AFC Championship, on the other hand, has only gone into overtime once since 1970. The Broncos and Browns 1986 NFC Championship clash was locked at 2020 in regulation. Denver scored on a field goal to take the win, advancing to Super Bowl XXI where they fell to the New York Giants, 3920. | Six conference championships have gone into overtime during the NFL playoffs. Five of those overtime games were in the NFC. | pegasus | 0 | https://www.si.com/nfl/2019/01/20/conference-championship-overtime-nfc-afc-history | 0.442733 |
Has a Conference Championship ever gone to overtime? | Six conference championships have gone into overtime during the NFL playoffs, with five of those overtime games coming in NFC clashes. The 2014 NFC Championship between the Packers and Seahawks was the most recent championship game to need extra time. The two teams went into overtime at CenturyLink Field in Seattle, Wash., after wrapping up regulation tied at 22 points apiece. The Seahawks secured the win with an overtime touchdown for six points. Seattle went into the Super Bowl with a 2822 conference championship win under its belt. The NFC championship also went into overtime during the 2011 playoffs, with the Giants defeating the 49ers by three, 2017, after an overtime field goal on Jan. 22, 2012.The 2009, 2007 and 1998 NFC championship games also went to overtime. The AFC Championship, on the other hand, has only gone into overtime once since 1970. The Broncos and Browns 1986 NFC Championship clash was locked at 2020 in regulation. Denver scored on a field goal to take the win, advancing to Super Bowl XXI where they fell to the New York Giants, 3920. | The 2014 NFC Championship between the Packers and Seahawks was the most recent championship game to need extra time. Six conference championships have gone into overtime during the NFL playoffs, with five of those overtime games coming in NFC clashes. | ctrlsum | 1 | https://www.si.com/nfl/2019/01/20/conference-championship-overtime-nfc-afc-history | 0.411124 |
Has a Conference Championship ever gone to overtime? | Six conference championships have gone into overtime during the NFL playoffs, with five of those overtime games coming in NFC clashes. The 2014 NFC Championship between the Packers and Seahawks was the most recent championship game to need extra time. The two teams went into overtime at CenturyLink Field in Seattle, Wash., after wrapping up regulation tied at 22 points apiece. The Seahawks secured the win with an overtime touchdown for six points. Seattle went into the Super Bowl with a 2822 conference championship win under its belt. The NFC championship also went into overtime during the 2011 playoffs, with the Giants defeating the 49ers by three, 2017, after an overtime field goal on Jan. 22, 2012.The 2009, 2007 and 1998 NFC championship games also went to overtime. The AFC Championship, on the other hand, has only gone into overtime once since 1970. The Broncos and Browns 1986 NFC Championship clash was locked at 2020 in regulation. Denver scored on a field goal to take the win, advancing to Super Bowl XXI where they fell to the New York Giants, 3920. | The 2014 NFC Championship between the Packers and Seahawks was the most recent championship game to need extra time. Six conference championships have gone into overtime during the NFL playoffs, with five of those overtime games coming in NFC clashes. The AFC Championship, on the other hand, has only gone into Overtime once since 1970. | ctrlsum | 2 | https://www.si.com/nfl/2019/01/20/conference-championship-overtime-nfc-afc-history | 0.414086 |
What is the Saints choppa-style dance? | If you've never heard of Darwin "Choppa" Turner and his 2003 single "Choppa Style," the New Orleans Saints are here to help. "Choppa Style," the soundtrack of the Saints' season, has seemingly taken hold of every member of Who Dat nation. In November, Alvin Kamara, Mark Ingram and Michael Thomas could be seen dancing to the single during the Saints' blowout win over the Eagles. Drew Brees's kids broke out the dance in pajamas and Santa hats on Christmas Eve. On Dec. 9, the dance and refrain went viral when backup quarterback Teddy Bridgewater introduced what he called the "Bike Life" dance to the New Orleans locker room, revving an imaginary handlebar's throttle. By the time the team geared up for the postseason, the motorcycle-themed dance became a bona fide craze and the Saints' unofficial anthem. The 2003 track peaked at No. 49 on the national R&B charts. The Saints were seen breaking out the moves before their 2014 win over the Eagles went final. The dancing continued well after the victory when Drew Brees threw an early birthday party on Jan. 14 and invited Choppa, a New Orleans native, to the bash. The Saints had plenty of reason to celebrate in 2018. The team's 133 regular season record was good enough to earn them the No. 1 seed in the NFC and home-field advantage throughout the playoffs. Brees finished the season with 3,992 yards, 32 touchdowns and five interceptions and could very well be named the league's MVP by the end of the month. And if the Saints defeat the Los Angeles Rams for the NFC title and a trip to Super Bowl LIII on Sunday, they'll certainly have reason to continue to dance. | "Choppa Style" is the soundtrack of the New Orleans Saints' season. | bart | 0 | https://www.si.com/nfl/2019/01/20/new-orleans-saints-choppa-style-dance-explained | 0.293544 |
What is the Saints choppa-style dance? | If you've never heard of Darwin "Choppa" Turner and his 2003 single "Choppa Style," the New Orleans Saints are here to help. "Choppa Style," the soundtrack of the Saints' season, has seemingly taken hold of every member of Who Dat nation. In November, Alvin Kamara, Mark Ingram and Michael Thomas could be seen dancing to the single during the Saints' blowout win over the Eagles. Drew Brees's kids broke out the dance in pajamas and Santa hats on Christmas Eve. On Dec. 9, the dance and refrain went viral when backup quarterback Teddy Bridgewater introduced what he called the "Bike Life" dance to the New Orleans locker room, revving an imaginary handlebar's throttle. By the time the team geared up for the postseason, the motorcycle-themed dance became a bona fide craze and the Saints' unofficial anthem. The 2003 track peaked at No. 49 on the national R&B charts. The Saints were seen breaking out the moves before their 2014 win over the Eagles went final. The dancing continued well after the victory when Drew Brees threw an early birthday party on Jan. 14 and invited Choppa, a New Orleans native, to the bash. The Saints had plenty of reason to celebrate in 2018. The team's 133 regular season record was good enough to earn them the No. 1 seed in the NFC and home-field advantage throughout the playoffs. Brees finished the season with 3,992 yards, 32 touchdowns and five interceptions and could very well be named the league's MVP by the end of the month. And if the Saints defeat the Los Angeles Rams for the NFC title and a trip to Super Bowl LIII on Sunday, they'll certainly have reason to continue to dance. | "Choppa Style" is the soundtrack of the New Orleans Saints' season. The Saints were seen breaking out the moves before their 2014 win over the Eagles. The 2003 track peaked at No. 49 on the national R&B charts. The team's 133 regular season record was good enough to earn them the No. 1 seed. | bart | 2 | https://www.si.com/nfl/2019/01/20/new-orleans-saints-choppa-style-dance-explained | 0.317852 |
Will Berkshire Hathaway Finally Pay a Dividend in 2019? | Berkshire Hathaway (NYSE: BRK-A) (NYSE: BRK-B) is one of the best-known companies in the world, largely because of the popularity of CEO Warren Buffett. Seen as one of the greatest investors of all time, Buffett loves to invest Berkshire's money in stocks that pay dividend income -- but he's never seen it necessary to have Berkshire start paying a dividend of its own to its shareholders. Few longtime shareholders have complained about Berkshire's lack of a dividend payout, given its strong share-price gains. Yet there are still some who believe that Berkshire should pay a dividend, especially because it has so much cash on hand. Below, we'll weigh those arguments and see whether it's likely that it will pull the trigger on a dividend to shareholders in 2019. Stats on Berkshire Hathaway Metric Current Stat Net income, last 12 months $61.96 billion Free cash flow, last 12 months $21.5 billion Earnings per Class A share, last 12 months $37,678 Earnings growth from full-year 2017 38% Data source: Yahoo! Finance. Buffett on dividends Buffett isn't blind to the apparent disconnect between Berkshire's policy on choosing dividend-paying investments and its own choice not to pay dividends. In his 2012 shareholder letter, Buffett admitted that Berkshire Hathaway generates a huge amount of available capital and that he expects it to continue to do so for the foreseeable future. He then set out his hierarchy for the best uses of that capital: In Buffett's own words, "A company's management should first examine reinvestment possibilities offered by its current business -- projects to become more efficient, expand territorially, extend and improve product lines, or to otherwise widen the economic moat separating the company from its competitors." When profitable reinvestment opportunities are available, they can produce greater benefits for shareholders than receiving cash. After exhausting those reinvestment opportunities, Buffett says, "Our next step is to search for acquisitions unrelated to our current businesses." The test for such acquisitions is whether they'll make shareholders better off than they were before the acquisition took place. Third, a company can consider stock repurchases. Buffett's argument here is one that he's repeated several times: "[A stock repurchase] is sensible for a company when its shares sell at a meaningful discount to conservatively calculated intrinsic value." Buffett then acknowledged that dividends are a way for shareholders to draw income from their holdings. Yet he argued that shareholders end up better off if they simply sell off a portion of their shares to generate the equivalent income, because that allows Berkshire to continue to grow. In addition, shareholders can time their sales to obtain the best tax consequences -- something that dividend payments take out of investors' hands. Warren Buffett with a bunch of people in the background out of focus. More Berkshire Hathaway CEO Warren Buffett. Image source: The Motley Fool. Even then, though, Buffett acknowledged the potential for a future dividend. His views rest on the assumption that Berkshire can continue to grow book value and sustain a premium in its share price. If those factors change, then he'd look at dividend policy again. Berkshire's ability to grow book value at a healthy rate relies on good investment ideas, and, unfortunately, they've been tough to find lately. That's driven Berkshire to loosen its guidelines on buying back its own shares, and it's also led to massive investments in some of the largest publicly traded stocks in the market -- investments that haven't always gone as well in the short run as some might have hoped. But it could also push Buffett toward considering a dividend as well. For now, though, Buffett seems content to use available capital for investing. As long as he's convinced that the long-term prospects of his investments will help Berkshire build up its book value over time, Berkshire shareholders shouldn't expect to start getting dividends. More From The Motley Fool Dan Caplinger owns shares of Berkshire Hathaway (B shares). The Motley Fool owns shares of and recommends Berkshire Hathaway (B shares). The Motley Fool has a disclosure policy. | Berkshire Hathaway has never paid a dividend to its shareholders. Some shareholders still believe that the company should pay a dividend in 2019. | ctrlsum | 0 | https://news.yahoo.com/berkshire-hathaway-finally-pay-dividend-163200746.html | 0.288626 |
Will Berkshire Hathaway Finally Pay a Dividend in 2019? | Berkshire Hathaway (NYSE: BRK-A) (NYSE: BRK-B) is one of the best-known companies in the world, largely because of the popularity of CEO Warren Buffett. Seen as one of the greatest investors of all time, Buffett loves to invest Berkshire's money in stocks that pay dividend income -- but he's never seen it necessary to have Berkshire start paying a dividend of its own to its shareholders. Few longtime shareholders have complained about Berkshire's lack of a dividend payout, given its strong share-price gains. Yet there are still some who believe that Berkshire should pay a dividend, especially because it has so much cash on hand. Below, we'll weigh those arguments and see whether it's likely that it will pull the trigger on a dividend to shareholders in 2019. Stats on Berkshire Hathaway Metric Current Stat Net income, last 12 months $61.96 billion Free cash flow, last 12 months $21.5 billion Earnings per Class A share, last 12 months $37,678 Earnings growth from full-year 2017 38% Data source: Yahoo! Finance. Buffett on dividends Buffett isn't blind to the apparent disconnect between Berkshire's policy on choosing dividend-paying investments and its own choice not to pay dividends. In his 2012 shareholder letter, Buffett admitted that Berkshire Hathaway generates a huge amount of available capital and that he expects it to continue to do so for the foreseeable future. He then set out his hierarchy for the best uses of that capital: In Buffett's own words, "A company's management should first examine reinvestment possibilities offered by its current business -- projects to become more efficient, expand territorially, extend and improve product lines, or to otherwise widen the economic moat separating the company from its competitors." When profitable reinvestment opportunities are available, they can produce greater benefits for shareholders than receiving cash. After exhausting those reinvestment opportunities, Buffett says, "Our next step is to search for acquisitions unrelated to our current businesses." The test for such acquisitions is whether they'll make shareholders better off than they were before the acquisition took place. Third, a company can consider stock repurchases. Buffett's argument here is one that he's repeated several times: "[A stock repurchase] is sensible for a company when its shares sell at a meaningful discount to conservatively calculated intrinsic value." Buffett then acknowledged that dividends are a way for shareholders to draw income from their holdings. Yet he argued that shareholders end up better off if they simply sell off a portion of their shares to generate the equivalent income, because that allows Berkshire to continue to grow. In addition, shareholders can time their sales to obtain the best tax consequences -- something that dividend payments take out of investors' hands. Warren Buffett with a bunch of people in the background out of focus. More Berkshire Hathaway CEO Warren Buffett. Image source: The Motley Fool. Even then, though, Buffett acknowledged the potential for a future dividend. His views rest on the assumption that Berkshire can continue to grow book value and sustain a premium in its share price. If those factors change, then he'd look at dividend policy again. Berkshire's ability to grow book value at a healthy rate relies on good investment ideas, and, unfortunately, they've been tough to find lately. That's driven Berkshire to loosen its guidelines on buying back its own shares, and it's also led to massive investments in some of the largest publicly traded stocks in the market -- investments that haven't always gone as well in the short run as some might have hoped. But it could also push Buffett toward considering a dividend as well. For now, though, Buffett seems content to use available capital for investing. As long as he's convinced that the long-term prospects of his investments will help Berkshire build up its book value over time, Berkshire shareholders shouldn't expect to start getting dividends. More From The Motley Fool Dan Caplinger owns shares of Berkshire Hathaway (B shares). The Motley Fool owns shares of and recommends Berkshire Hathaway (B shares). The Motley Fool has a disclosure policy. | Berkshire Hathaway has never paid a dividend to its shareholders. Some shareholders still believe that Berkshire should pay a dividend, especially because it has so much cash on hand. We'll weigh those arguments and see whether it's likely that it will pull the trigger on a dividend in 2019. | ctrlsum | 2 | https://news.yahoo.com/berkshire-hathaway-finally-pay-dividend-163200746.html | 0.131939 |
Is Cognex a Buy? | Machine vision specialist Cognex (NASDAQ: CGNX) is a much-admired growth company with significant exposure to many long-term growth trends -- the increasing use of automation and robotics in manufacturing and growth in e-commerce fulfillment centers, to name two. Everybody knows what you should do with such stocks -- buy on any significant near-term weakness caused by a downside shock as long as the long-term growth expectations are in place. Let's look at the arguments for and against. The case for buying Cognex stock There are three key reasons to buy the stock. First, the company's long-term growth depends on secular trends, which are augmented by cyclical factors. The bulls see 2018 as a year when some cyclical factors went against the company -- a moderation in capital spending by OLED/smartphone customers and slowing spending by customers in China -- but those issues shouldn't affect long-term prospects. Coins and cash More Image source: Getty Images. For example, as e-commerce grows as a share of global retail sales, it's likely that spending on e-fulfillment centers will increase dramatically -- that's good news for Cognex's machine vision solutions, which help logistics centers monitor and sort packages. Although logistics sales make up less than 10% of current sales, management sees them growing at 50% a year over the long-term. Moreover, even if consumer electronics and automotive markets (Cognex's two big industry verticals) are seeing slowing end-market conditions, there is still pressure on customers to automate production. Second, if you accept that Cognex is a long-term growth stock, its current cash flow valuation is starting to look attractive. As I've previously argued, a high-growth stock like Cognex is a good value if you can buy it on a free cash flow yield of around 3%. As you can see below, the current price-to-free-cash-flow multiple is around 37 times, or a free cash flow yield of 2.7% -- that's a good value for a stock that's capable of 20% revenue growth over the long term. CGNX Chart More CGNX data by YCharts Third, history suggests that it's usually a good idea to buy into Cognex when there isn't too much optimism baked in -- and a bad idea to buy in when there's a lot of optimism. For example, the company entered 2018 with management talking about market conditions being the best ever experienced, only to disappoint the market later in the year -- the stock declined 37% in 2018. | Cognex (NASDAQ: CGNX) is a much-admired growth company with significant exposure to many long-term growth trends. There are three key reasons to buy the stock. | bart | 1 | https://news.yahoo.com/cognex-buy-160600502.html | 0.229683 |
Is Cognex a Buy? | Machine vision specialist Cognex (NASDAQ: CGNX) is a much-admired growth company with significant exposure to many long-term growth trends -- the increasing use of automation and robotics in manufacturing and growth in e-commerce fulfillment centers, to name two. Everybody knows what you should do with such stocks -- buy on any significant near-term weakness caused by a downside shock as long as the long-term growth expectations are in place. Let's look at the arguments for and against. The case for buying Cognex stock There are three key reasons to buy the stock. First, the company's long-term growth depends on secular trends, which are augmented by cyclical factors. The bulls see 2018 as a year when some cyclical factors went against the company -- a moderation in capital spending by OLED/smartphone customers and slowing spending by customers in China -- but those issues shouldn't affect long-term prospects. Coins and cash More Image source: Getty Images. For example, as e-commerce grows as a share of global retail sales, it's likely that spending on e-fulfillment centers will increase dramatically -- that's good news for Cognex's machine vision solutions, which help logistics centers monitor and sort packages. Although logistics sales make up less than 10% of current sales, management sees them growing at 50% a year over the long-term. Moreover, even if consumer electronics and automotive markets (Cognex's two big industry verticals) are seeing slowing end-market conditions, there is still pressure on customers to automate production. Second, if you accept that Cognex is a long-term growth stock, its current cash flow valuation is starting to look attractive. As I've previously argued, a high-growth stock like Cognex is a good value if you can buy it on a free cash flow yield of around 3%. As you can see below, the current price-to-free-cash-flow multiple is around 37 times, or a free cash flow yield of 2.7% -- that's a good value for a stock that's capable of 20% revenue growth over the long term. CGNX Chart More CGNX data by YCharts Third, history suggests that it's usually a good idea to buy into Cognex when there isn't too much optimism baked in -- and a bad idea to buy in when there's a lot of optimism. For example, the company entered 2018 with management talking about market conditions being the best ever experienced, only to disappoint the market later in the year -- the stock declined 37% in 2018. | Cognex (NASDAQ: CGNX) is a much-admired growth company with significant exposure to many long-term growth trends. There are three key reasons to buy the stock: secular trends, cyclical factors, and a good value on a 3% free cash flow yield. | ctrlsum | 2 | https://news.yahoo.com/cognex-buy-160600502.html | 0.348464 |
What Are Crypto Executives Still Positive About After Massive 80% Bitcoin Drop? | By CCN.com: In 2018, with the exception of Bitcoin and several other crypto assets, the majority of cryptocurrencies fell by more than 90 percent against the U.S. dollar. Executives in the crypto space, especially those leading new initiatives and businesses in the emerging industry, believe that the bear market has presented companies with positive opportunities to rebuild the foundations of the asset class and the sector. Merits of a Crypto Bear Market The majority of blockchain projects developing protocols or decentralized applications (dApps) have conducted initial coin offerings (ICOs) or token sales in 2017. As such, the valuation of many blockchain companies has been dependent on the performance of tokens. During a bear market, as seen in previous years, cryptocurrencies with strong fundamentals tend to survive and demonstrate minimized losses. According to the data provided by ATHCoinIndex, most major crypto assets such as Ripple, Ethereum, Bitcoin Cash, Litecoin, and Cardano have fallen by 90 to 97 percent from their all-time highs against the U.S. dollar in the past 12 months. Meanwhile, Bitcoin, the most dominant cryptocurrency in the market, has dropped by 82 percent in a 12-month period. Bitcoin remains as one of the few crypto assets to have seen an increase in hash rate throughout the correction. Since January 2018, the hash rate of the Bitcoin network has increased from 15 exahash to 45 exahash, by at least three-fold. Considering the tendency of small market cryptocurrencies or tokens to fall by large margins in comparison to Bitcoin on a downward trend, during a correction, investors often acquire blockchain projects building long-term blockchain-related applications, protocols, and solutions at a substantially lower price. Sheri Kaiserman, the principal advisor of a U.S. investment and recruiting company Maco.la, said: We felt like the best way to make money is to buy the infrastructure companies the picks and shovels that are helping build the foundation. They are coming down in valuation, which is the best part of the crypto winter for us At the peak of the crypto market in late 2017, many blockchain protocols were valued at billions of dollars and the majority of the projects failed to showcase working products and active user bases. In the past 14 months, blockchain projects have fallen to a reasonable valuation, presenting opportunities for investors to acquire equity in infrastructure building companies. Easy to Pick up Talent Previously, CCN reported that the salary of blockchain developers in regions like Switzerland have increased to around $180,000, triggered by a growing interest in blockchain technology internationally. But, job offers in crypto, at least in the past year, have mostly been presented by blockchain companies that have obtained capital through token sales. As blockchain protocols began to decline in valuation and teams started to experience a funding crunch, developers and talent were let go. Spring Labs CEO Adam Jiwan told Bloomberg that it has allowed newly entering companies and existing established businesses to recruit more talent. The skepticism is warranted in many ways because this technology is nascent and untested at an industrial scale. Our hope is this presents us with a great opportunity to recruit talent, he said. appeared first on CCN. | In 2018, with the exception of Bitcoin and several other crypto assets, the majority of cryptocurrencies fell by more than 90 percent against the U.S. dollar. Executives in the crypto space believe that the bear market has presented companies with positive opportunities to rebuild the foundations of the asset class and the sector. | bart | 2 | https://news.yahoo.com/crypto-executives-still-positive-massive-162112694.html | 0.533988 |
When was the last time the Chiefs went to the Super Bowl? | One win stands between the Kansas City Chiefs and the Super Bowl, a stage the team has not played on in 49 years. The Chiefs became the second AFL to defeat an NFL team in an AFL-NFL World Championship Game in 1970, taking down the Minnesota Vikings 237 in Super Bowl IV. Kansas City hasn't been back to the Super Bowl since. Kansas City reached Super Bowl I after winning the AFL Championship in 1966, but the Chiefs lost to the NFL's Green Bay Packers. In 1962, in the pre-Super Bowl era, the franchisethen the Dallas Texanswon the AFL by beating the Houston Oilers in overtime. The Chiefs rank behind only the Detroit Lions and the New York Jets for the longest Super Bowl drought in the NFL. The Lions have not made it back to to the big game in 61 seasons, while the Jets haven't appeared in a Super Bowl in 50. Chiefs Super Bowl History Super Bowl I: Packers 35, Chiefs 10 Super Bowl IV: Chiefs 23, Vikings 7 The Chiefs host the New England Patriots in the AFC Championship on Sunday, Jan. 20 at 6:40 p.m. ET. | The Chiefs have not played in the Super Bowl since Super Bowl IV in 1970. Kansas City won the AFL Championship in 1966 before reaching the Super Bowl. | pegasus | 0 | https://www.si.com/nfl/2019/01/20/kansas-city-chiefs-super-bowl-history-last-time | 0.466577 |
When was the last time the Chiefs went to the Super Bowl? | One win stands between the Kansas City Chiefs and the Super Bowl, a stage the team has not played on in 49 years. The Chiefs became the second AFL to defeat an NFL team in an AFL-NFL World Championship Game in 1970, taking down the Minnesota Vikings 237 in Super Bowl IV. Kansas City hasn't been back to the Super Bowl since. Kansas City reached Super Bowl I after winning the AFL Championship in 1966, but the Chiefs lost to the NFL's Green Bay Packers. In 1962, in the pre-Super Bowl era, the franchisethen the Dallas Texanswon the AFL by beating the Houston Oilers in overtime. The Chiefs rank behind only the Detroit Lions and the New York Jets for the longest Super Bowl drought in the NFL. The Lions have not made it back to to the big game in 61 seasons, while the Jets haven't appeared in a Super Bowl in 50. Chiefs Super Bowl History Super Bowl I: Packers 35, Chiefs 10 Super Bowl IV: Chiefs 23, Vikings 7 The Chiefs host the New England Patriots in the AFC Championship on Sunday, Jan. 20 at 6:40 p.m. ET. | The Kansas City Chiefs haven't played in the Super Bowl since 1970. The team won the AFL Championship in 1966, but lost to the Green Bay Packers in Super Bowl I. The Chiefs host the New England Patriots in the AFC Championship on Sunday. | pegasus | 1 | https://www.si.com/nfl/2019/01/20/kansas-city-chiefs-super-bowl-history-last-time | 0.468726 |
When was the last time the Chiefs went to the Super Bowl? | One win stands between the Kansas City Chiefs and the Super Bowl, a stage the team has not played on in 49 years. The Chiefs became the second AFL to defeat an NFL team in an AFL-NFL World Championship Game in 1970, taking down the Minnesota Vikings 237 in Super Bowl IV. Kansas City hasn't been back to the Super Bowl since. Kansas City reached Super Bowl I after winning the AFL Championship in 1966, but the Chiefs lost to the NFL's Green Bay Packers. In 1962, in the pre-Super Bowl era, the franchisethen the Dallas Texanswon the AFL by beating the Houston Oilers in overtime. The Chiefs rank behind only the Detroit Lions and the New York Jets for the longest Super Bowl drought in the NFL. The Lions have not made it back to to the big game in 61 seasons, while the Jets haven't appeared in a Super Bowl in 50. Chiefs Super Bowl History Super Bowl I: Packers 35, Chiefs 10 Super Bowl IV: Chiefs 23, Vikings 7 The Chiefs host the New England Patriots in the AFC Championship on Sunday, Jan. 20 at 6:40 p.m. ET. | The Kansas City Chiefs haven't been to the Super Bowl in 49 years. The franchise reached Super Bowl I in 1966, but lost to the Green Bay Packers. The Chiefs became the second AFL to defeat an NFL team in an AFL-NFL World Championship Game in 1970. Kansas City hasn't been back to the big game since. | bart | 2 | https://www.si.com/nfl/2019/01/20/kansas-city-chiefs-super-bowl-history-last-time | 0.406585 |
Have the Chiefs ever won the Super Bowl? | The Kansas City Chiefs are one game away from booking their ticket to Super Bowl LIII. The Chiefs haven't made it to the big game in recent memory, but should they make it past Tom Brady and the New England Patriots on Sunday, it won't be the first time they'll have played for a Super Bowl ring. After winning three AFL championships in 1962, 1966 and 1969, the Chiefs became the second AFL to defeat an NFL team in an AFL-NFL World Championship Game, taking down the Minnesota Vikings 237 in Super Bowl IV. Kansas City's defense held the Vikings to just 67 rushing yards, forced three interceptions and recovered two fumbles en route to the win. Len Dawson was named the Super Bowl MVP after going 12-of-17 for 142 yards for one touchdown and an interception. The team's victory in 1970 remains the Chiefs' only Super Bowl victory and their last appearance to date. | The Kansas City Chiefs are one game away from booking their ticket to Super Bowl LIII. The team's only Super Bowl victory came in 1970. | ctrlsum | 0 | https://www.si.com/nfl/2019/01/20/have-kansas-city-chiefs-ever-won-super-bowl | 0.39738 |
Have the Chiefs ever won the Super Bowl? | The Kansas City Chiefs are one game away from booking their ticket to Super Bowl LIII. The Chiefs haven't made it to the big game in recent memory, but should they make it past Tom Brady and the New England Patriots on Sunday, it won't be the first time they'll have played for a Super Bowl ring. After winning three AFL championships in 1962, 1966 and 1969, the Chiefs became the second AFL to defeat an NFL team in an AFL-NFL World Championship Game, taking down the Minnesota Vikings 237 in Super Bowl IV. Kansas City's defense held the Vikings to just 67 rushing yards, forced three interceptions and recovered two fumbles en route to the win. Len Dawson was named the Super Bowl MVP after going 12-of-17 for 142 yards for one touchdown and an interception. The team's victory in 1970 remains the Chiefs' only Super Bowl victory and their last appearance to date. | The Kansas City Chiefs are one game away from making it to Super Bowl LIII. The team's victory in 1970 remains the Chiefs' only Super Bowl victory. The Chiefs became the second AFL team to defeat an NFL team in Super Bowl IV. | bart | 1 | https://www.si.com/nfl/2019/01/20/have-kansas-city-chiefs-ever-won-super-bowl | 0.393585 |
Have the Chiefs ever won the Super Bowl? | The Kansas City Chiefs are one game away from booking their ticket to Super Bowl LIII. The Chiefs haven't made it to the big game in recent memory, but should they make it past Tom Brady and the New England Patriots on Sunday, it won't be the first time they'll have played for a Super Bowl ring. After winning three AFL championships in 1962, 1966 and 1969, the Chiefs became the second AFL to defeat an NFL team in an AFL-NFL World Championship Game, taking down the Minnesota Vikings 237 in Super Bowl IV. Kansas City's defense held the Vikings to just 67 rushing yards, forced three interceptions and recovered two fumbles en route to the win. Len Dawson was named the Super Bowl MVP after going 12-of-17 for 142 yards for one touchdown and an interception. The team's victory in 1970 remains the Chiefs' only Super Bowl victory and their last appearance to date. | The Kansas City Chiefs are one game away from booking their ticket to Super Bowl LIII. The team's victory in 1970 remains the Chiefs' only Super Bowl victory and their last appearance to date. The Chiefs have won three AFL championships in 1962, 1966 and 1969, but have never won a Super Bowl. | ctrlsum | 2 | https://www.si.com/nfl/2019/01/20/have-kansas-city-chiefs-ever-won-super-bowl | 0.467032 |
Is MoneyGram International a Buy? | 2018 was not a good year for money-transfer specialist MoneyGram International (NASDAQ: MGI). A planned acquisition by China's Ant Financial was nixed after the federal government objected to it on national-security grounds. Later in the year, the company agreed to a $125 million settlement with the Federal Trade Commission (FTC), chiefly over laxity in policing fraudulent use of its services. Forward guidance was cut significantly when news of the settlement was made public. To no one's surprise, these incidents made MoneyGram a pariah among investors, with the share price cratering by nearly 85% during the year. The question that this brings up, of course, is whether that makes the stock a bottom-feeder buy now. Let's explore. A plaque that says "Money transfer" sitting atop foreign coins and bills. More Image source: Getty Images. Jilted and punished The Ant Financial ruling and the FTC settlement were both hard blows. Together they put MoneyGram on the mat. The former really hurt, since the sale price -- $1.2 billion, or $18 per share, in cash -- was pumped up by a bidding war between the Chinese company and Euronet Worldwide (NASDAQ: EEFT), which had tried previously to buy the company in 2007. Anyway, Ant Financial initially offered the equivalent of "only" around $880 million before Euronet Worldwide entered the fray. Ant Financial and Euronet Worldwide surely saw a quick way to expand by buying MoneyGram. Their potential acquisition had 2.4 billion accounts that could access MoneyGram services at around 350,000 locations around the world. Growth was in the cards, too, with the total number of global migrants (an obvious demographic for international transfer-specialist MoneyGram) rising at times precipitously during this decade. MoneyGram probably also looked good in the wake of the then-new Trump administration's aggressive stance on immigration, particularly from south of our border. That's because MoneyGram does a brisk business in U.S.-to-Mexico remittances. The theory was that these would rise in the wake of a tougher immigration regime. The company's results indicate this hasn't happened. Revenue dropped both sequentially and on a year-over-year basis in the first three quarters of fiscal 2018. The company's most recent (Q3) tally of $347 million was well below the peaks that occurred shortly before Trump took office. Compounding this, a raft of smaller competitors are always biting at the heels of established operators like MoneyGram. When MoneyGram is profitable, its margins are thin -- after all, international money transfer is a volume business. Companies in this segment have to make their services attractive enough to win customers, while ensuring that the agents involved in the transactions get a small cut of the payments for their work. This doesn't leave a lot left for MoneyGram's pocket, and the FTC settlement won't help. Concurrent with announcing its deal with the regulator, the company revised its estimate for a full-year fiscal 2018 annual revenue decline to roughly 10% from the previous projection of 4% to 6%. MoneyGram also now believes EBITDA will come in about 15% lower on a constant-currency basis (former estimate: 8% to 10%). Leave this one at the altar At the beginning of fiscal 2018, MoneyGram launched its Digital Transformation Initiative, an attempt to move much of its business onto various e-platforms. This feels late to me, since many other corners of the finance business spent heavily on digital assets quite some years ago, and no longer require major initiatives to get there. | MoneyGram International (NASDAQ: MGI) had a tough year in 2018. The company's share price fell 85% and its revenue fell by 10%. But the stock is still a good buy now. | ctrlsum | 1 | https://news.yahoo.com/moneygram-international-buy-200900507.html | 0.337455 |
Is MoneyGram International a Buy? | 2018 was not a good year for money-transfer specialist MoneyGram International (NASDAQ: MGI). A planned acquisition by China's Ant Financial was nixed after the federal government objected to it on national-security grounds. Later in the year, the company agreed to a $125 million settlement with the Federal Trade Commission (FTC), chiefly over laxity in policing fraudulent use of its services. Forward guidance was cut significantly when news of the settlement was made public. To no one's surprise, these incidents made MoneyGram a pariah among investors, with the share price cratering by nearly 85% during the year. The question that this brings up, of course, is whether that makes the stock a bottom-feeder buy now. Let's explore. A plaque that says "Money transfer" sitting atop foreign coins and bills. More Image source: Getty Images. Jilted and punished The Ant Financial ruling and the FTC settlement were both hard blows. Together they put MoneyGram on the mat. The former really hurt, since the sale price -- $1.2 billion, or $18 per share, in cash -- was pumped up by a bidding war between the Chinese company and Euronet Worldwide (NASDAQ: EEFT), which had tried previously to buy the company in 2007. Anyway, Ant Financial initially offered the equivalent of "only" around $880 million before Euronet Worldwide entered the fray. Ant Financial and Euronet Worldwide surely saw a quick way to expand by buying MoneyGram. Their potential acquisition had 2.4 billion accounts that could access MoneyGram services at around 350,000 locations around the world. Growth was in the cards, too, with the total number of global migrants (an obvious demographic for international transfer-specialist MoneyGram) rising at times precipitously during this decade. MoneyGram probably also looked good in the wake of the then-new Trump administration's aggressive stance on immigration, particularly from south of our border. That's because MoneyGram does a brisk business in U.S.-to-Mexico remittances. The theory was that these would rise in the wake of a tougher immigration regime. The company's results indicate this hasn't happened. Revenue dropped both sequentially and on a year-over-year basis in the first three quarters of fiscal 2018. The company's most recent (Q3) tally of $347 million was well below the peaks that occurred shortly before Trump took office. Compounding this, a raft of smaller competitors are always biting at the heels of established operators like MoneyGram. When MoneyGram is profitable, its margins are thin -- after all, international money transfer is a volume business. Companies in this segment have to make their services attractive enough to win customers, while ensuring that the agents involved in the transactions get a small cut of the payments for their work. This doesn't leave a lot left for MoneyGram's pocket, and the FTC settlement won't help. Concurrent with announcing its deal with the regulator, the company revised its estimate for a full-year fiscal 2018 annual revenue decline to roughly 10% from the previous projection of 4% to 6%. MoneyGram also now believes EBITDA will come in about 15% lower on a constant-currency basis (former estimate: 8% to 10%). Leave this one at the altar At the beginning of fiscal 2018, MoneyGram launched its Digital Transformation Initiative, an attempt to move much of its business onto various e-platforms. This feels late to me, since many other corners of the finance business spent heavily on digital assets quite some years ago, and no longer require major initiatives to get there. | MoneyGram International (NASDAQ: MGI) had a tough year in 2018. The company's share price fell 85% and its revenue fell by 10%. But the stock is still cheap, and it's worth a look at whether it's a buy now. | ctrlsum | 2 | https://news.yahoo.com/moneygram-international-buy-200900507.html | 0.126033 |
Who is interpreter Marina Gross and will her notes of Trump's Putin meeting be useful? | Marina Gross, a State Department interpreter, was the only other American in the room during President Donald Trump's one-on-one meeting with Russian President Putin in Helsinki last summer. ABC News has learned new details about the 64-year-old interpreter with the State Department's Office of Language Services who is at the center of the political storm over what she might know about the private conversations Trump held with Putin during their meeting in Helsinki last summer. State Department via Flickr Neither Gross nor her close family members provided comment for this story when contacted by ABC News. Veteran interpreters are concerned that a Congressional subpoena of Gross or her notes of the meeting would set a dangerous precedent. They also question whether her interpreting notes would contain actual contents of the meeting itself. Born in Russia, Gross was in her mid-20's when she and her family members immigrated to the United States in the late 1980s in the waning days of the Soviet Union. In the 1990s Gross began interpreting for the State Department as a contract interpreter. Alexey Nikolsky/Sputnik/Kremlin/EPA via Shutterstock Well respected, she was later hired by the State Department and currently works as one of two Russian staff interpreters at the departments Office of Language Services That office hires interpreters and translators who work throughout the U.S. government, including with the president. Interpreters play a vital role in key international meetings where their language services are on full display, but by training, they remain in the shadows. Shealah Craighead/White House Accordingly, few pictures exist of Gross, other than those publicly released by the White House or the State Department where she was seen interpreting for first lady Laura Bush and former Secretary of State Rex Tillerson. But it is Gross' work in Helsinki on July 16 that has sparked the interest of Congressional Democrats because she was the only other American in the room for Trump's two-hour long meeting with Putin and his own interpreter. Trump has met with Putin five times, but only twice in formal one-on-one meetings held in Hamburg and Helsinki. Tillerson sat in with both presidents during their Hamburg meeting and provided other national security officials and reporters with a brief readout of issues that were discussed, but the Washington Post reported that the U.S. government has no internal notes of that meeting and that Trump seized the notes taken by his interpreter. Since then, Congressional Democrats have said they want to gain access to Gross' notes to understand what Trump may have spoken about with Putin. A previous effort last year by Democrats to subpoena Gross and the interpreter at Trump's Hamburg meeting were shelved by Republicans who were in control the House of Representatives. Last week Michael McFaul, the former U.S. ambassador tweeted his support of Gross describing her as "a fantastic interpreter" and "a terrific person to boot!" Marina Gross is a fantastic interpreter (and terrific person to boot! ): "Marina Gross: 5 Fast Facts You Need to Know" https://t.co/WFLu0RdOQk via @heavysan Michael McFaul (@McFaul) January 14, 2019 'A DANGEROUS PRECEDENT' Professional interpreters are concerned about the dangerous precedent that would be set by Congress if a diplomatic interpreter is subpoenaed. "I've never heard of that happening in the 30 years that I worked the State Department or subsequently since I retired," said Dimitry Zarechnak a former interpreter with the State Department's Office of Language Services, who interpreted for President Ronald Reagan during some of his summits with Mikhail Gorbachev, the last leader of the Soviet Union. "I think it would just be a very bad move and bad precedent for diplomacy in general," he told ABC News. Harry Obst, the former director of the Office of Language Services who interpreted for seven American presidents, said that if he was placed in a similar situation, "I would not divulge any information." "That's because of the oath that you swear to not divulge any classified information on any level," he said. "Because you have a top secret clearance." A greater concern is the impact a subpoena could have on state leaders excluding interpreters from their meeting if they believe they could be subpoenaed by Congress in the future. "The whole idea of subpoenaing an interpreter is atrocious," said Zarechnak. "What foreign leader would want to meet with the U.S. leader thinking that 'well, the interpreter could be subpoenaed and tell Congress what the meeting was about.'" And a subpoena could also lead a U.S. interpreter to not rely on American interpreters. "The president would also have a great incentive not to use our interpreter if there was a danger that that interpreter would then be subpoenaed in Congress," said Zarechnak. Zarechnak noted that was something President Richard Nixon practiced during his his one-on-one meetings with Soviet leaders in the 1970s. "Unfortunately President Nixon and [former Secretary of State Henry] Kissinger specifically did not use our interpreters," said Zarechnak. "I guess for the sake of their secrecy" they relied only on the Soviet interpreters during their meetings. Both veteran interpreters question whether Gross' notes would be of much historical value. Even if investigators successfully gained access to Gross' notes "they wouldn't know what to do with them in the first place" said Obst. That's because as a matter of course the notes taken by professional interpreters are less about taking verbatim quotes than they are about getting the right inflection or meaning of a word or sentence. Interpreters use symbols or meanings for words or proper context that are only comprehensible to them at that specific moment in time. What might be more useful are the official classified documents, known as "memorandums of conversation" or MemCon's, that are compiled by interpreters using their handwritten notes. MemCon's are ultimately only accessible by the Secretary of State and Obst said often times an interpreter will destroy the handwritten notes used during a meeting because they are no longer as relevant as the classified official document. "So really what is saved is the memo not the notes themselves," said Obst. Zarechnak recalls how the MemCon he wrote from his notes of the consecutive translation he took during the one-on-one meetings during the 1985 Reagan-Gorbachev summit in Geneva were declassified 15 years later. That declassified MemCon captures a detailed flavor of the topics that were discussed during one meeting as well as Zarechnak's take about Gorbachev's. During a lengthy exchange on human rights in the Soviet Union, "Gorbachev interrupted, without listening to the translation, to say that he had understood what the President had said, and that he took all of this into account. He was familiar with the American political process, and the President should not hide behind this." Zarechnak then added his take on Gorbachev's interruption and what it might mean about Gorbachev's knowledge of English. "(U.S. Interpreter's Note: Gorbachev's indication that he had understood what the President had said without translation was unexpected, since he had never shown any indication of understanding English in previous or subsequent conversations. After the President's following remarks, Gorbachev specifically asked for interpretation and looked like he had not understood what the President had said. I think that the first time he was simply assuming that he knew what the President was saying, and was anxious to get into the plenary meeting.)" Since MemCons are classified, the access to details of the Helsinki meeting that congressional Democrats want, may ultimately rest with Trump. Obst told ABC News that only a president can release an interpreter from disclosing classified information gathered during a private meeting. | Marina Gross, a State Department interpreter, was the only other American in the room during President Donald Trump's one-on-one meeting with Russian President Putin in Helsinki last summer. | bart | 1 | https://abcnews.go.com/Politics/interpreter-marina-gross-notes-trumps-putin-meeting/story?id=60374126 | 0.371084 |
Who is interpreter Marina Gross and will her notes of Trump's Putin meeting be useful? | Marina Gross, a State Department interpreter, was the only other American in the room during President Donald Trump's one-on-one meeting with Russian President Putin in Helsinki last summer. ABC News has learned new details about the 64-year-old interpreter with the State Department's Office of Language Services who is at the center of the political storm over what she might know about the private conversations Trump held with Putin during their meeting in Helsinki last summer. State Department via Flickr Neither Gross nor her close family members provided comment for this story when contacted by ABC News. Veteran interpreters are concerned that a Congressional subpoena of Gross or her notes of the meeting would set a dangerous precedent. They also question whether her interpreting notes would contain actual contents of the meeting itself. Born in Russia, Gross was in her mid-20's when she and her family members immigrated to the United States in the late 1980s in the waning days of the Soviet Union. In the 1990s Gross began interpreting for the State Department as a contract interpreter. Alexey Nikolsky/Sputnik/Kremlin/EPA via Shutterstock Well respected, she was later hired by the State Department and currently works as one of two Russian staff interpreters at the departments Office of Language Services That office hires interpreters and translators who work throughout the U.S. government, including with the president. Interpreters play a vital role in key international meetings where their language services are on full display, but by training, they remain in the shadows. Shealah Craighead/White House Accordingly, few pictures exist of Gross, other than those publicly released by the White House or the State Department where she was seen interpreting for first lady Laura Bush and former Secretary of State Rex Tillerson. But it is Gross' work in Helsinki on July 16 that has sparked the interest of Congressional Democrats because she was the only other American in the room for Trump's two-hour long meeting with Putin and his own interpreter. Trump has met with Putin five times, but only twice in formal one-on-one meetings held in Hamburg and Helsinki. Tillerson sat in with both presidents during their Hamburg meeting and provided other national security officials and reporters with a brief readout of issues that were discussed, but the Washington Post reported that the U.S. government has no internal notes of that meeting and that Trump seized the notes taken by his interpreter. Since then, Congressional Democrats have said they want to gain access to Gross' notes to understand what Trump may have spoken about with Putin. A previous effort last year by Democrats to subpoena Gross and the interpreter at Trump's Hamburg meeting were shelved by Republicans who were in control the House of Representatives. Last week Michael McFaul, the former U.S. ambassador tweeted his support of Gross describing her as "a fantastic interpreter" and "a terrific person to boot!" Marina Gross is a fantastic interpreter (and terrific person to boot! ): "Marina Gross: 5 Fast Facts You Need to Know" https://t.co/WFLu0RdOQk via @heavysan Michael McFaul (@McFaul) January 14, 2019 'A DANGEROUS PRECEDENT' Professional interpreters are concerned about the dangerous precedent that would be set by Congress if a diplomatic interpreter is subpoenaed. "I've never heard of that happening in the 30 years that I worked the State Department or subsequently since I retired," said Dimitry Zarechnak a former interpreter with the State Department's Office of Language Services, who interpreted for President Ronald Reagan during some of his summits with Mikhail Gorbachev, the last leader of the Soviet Union. "I think it would just be a very bad move and bad precedent for diplomacy in general," he told ABC News. Harry Obst, the former director of the Office of Language Services who interpreted for seven American presidents, said that if he was placed in a similar situation, "I would not divulge any information." "That's because of the oath that you swear to not divulge any classified information on any level," he said. "Because you have a top secret clearance." A greater concern is the impact a subpoena could have on state leaders excluding interpreters from their meeting if they believe they could be subpoenaed by Congress in the future. "The whole idea of subpoenaing an interpreter is atrocious," said Zarechnak. "What foreign leader would want to meet with the U.S. leader thinking that 'well, the interpreter could be subpoenaed and tell Congress what the meeting was about.'" And a subpoena could also lead a U.S. interpreter to not rely on American interpreters. "The president would also have a great incentive not to use our interpreter if there was a danger that that interpreter would then be subpoenaed in Congress," said Zarechnak. Zarechnak noted that was something President Richard Nixon practiced during his his one-on-one meetings with Soviet leaders in the 1970s. "Unfortunately President Nixon and [former Secretary of State Henry] Kissinger specifically did not use our interpreters," said Zarechnak. "I guess for the sake of their secrecy" they relied only on the Soviet interpreters during their meetings. Both veteran interpreters question whether Gross' notes would be of much historical value. Even if investigators successfully gained access to Gross' notes "they wouldn't know what to do with them in the first place" said Obst. That's because as a matter of course the notes taken by professional interpreters are less about taking verbatim quotes than they are about getting the right inflection or meaning of a word or sentence. Interpreters use symbols or meanings for words or proper context that are only comprehensible to them at that specific moment in time. What might be more useful are the official classified documents, known as "memorandums of conversation" or MemCon's, that are compiled by interpreters using their handwritten notes. MemCon's are ultimately only accessible by the Secretary of State and Obst said often times an interpreter will destroy the handwritten notes used during a meeting because they are no longer as relevant as the classified official document. "So really what is saved is the memo not the notes themselves," said Obst. Zarechnak recalls how the MemCon he wrote from his notes of the consecutive translation he took during the one-on-one meetings during the 1985 Reagan-Gorbachev summit in Geneva were declassified 15 years later. That declassified MemCon captures a detailed flavor of the topics that were discussed during one meeting as well as Zarechnak's take about Gorbachev's. During a lengthy exchange on human rights in the Soviet Union, "Gorbachev interrupted, without listening to the translation, to say that he had understood what the President had said, and that he took all of this into account. He was familiar with the American political process, and the President should not hide behind this." Zarechnak then added his take on Gorbachev's interruption and what it might mean about Gorbachev's knowledge of English. "(U.S. Interpreter's Note: Gorbachev's indication that he had understood what the President had said without translation was unexpected, since he had never shown any indication of understanding English in previous or subsequent conversations. After the President's following remarks, Gorbachev specifically asked for interpretation and looked like he had not understood what the President had said. I think that the first time he was simply assuming that he knew what the President was saying, and was anxious to get into the plenary meeting.)" Since MemCons are classified, the access to details of the Helsinki meeting that congressional Democrats want, may ultimately rest with Trump. Obst told ABC News that only a president can release an interpreter from disclosing classified information gathered during a private meeting. | Marina Gross, a State Department interpreter, was the only other American in the room during President Donald Trump's one-on-one meeting with Russian President Putin in Helsinki last summer. Congressional Democrats have said they want to gain access to Gross' notes to understand what Trump may have spoken about with Putin. | bart | 2 | https://abcnews.go.com/Politics/interpreter-marina-gross-notes-trumps-putin-meeting/story?id=60374126 | 0.535466 |
Why do Texans need to worry about unhealthy weight and cancer? | Texas is No. 1 in something we don't want to be known for. : the highest rates of cancers that can be attributed to excessive body weight, according to data from a report from the American Cancer Society and published in JAMA Oncology (Journal of the American Medical Association). Those cancers include ones of these places: where the stomach and esophagus connect, colorectum, liver, gallbladder, pancreas, female breasts, main part of the uterus, ovary, kidney, renal pelvis and thyroid. About 1 in 17 cancers in the U.S. are known to be related to excess body weight. It's a good reminder to keep that New Year's resolution to be healthier in 2019. We don't know for sure, says Mika Cline, an oncologist with Texas Oncology. "We don't know if it has something to do with ethnic ratio or male to female ratio." Women in the U.S. have a rate of cancers related to excess body weight of 9.6 percent of all cancers. Men in the U.S. have a rate of 4.7 percent of cancers related to excess body weight. In Texas, the overall rate of these cancers was 8.1 percent. Alaska was next at 7.9 percent, followed by Indiana at 7.7 percent. Texas also had the highest number of men with these cancers: 6 percent. What we do know is that there is evidence that excess weight and cancer have a relationship, Cline says. Excess weight might be related to hormone levels, and hormones impact certain cancers such as prostate, breast and endometrial. We also know that excess weight creates a state of inflammation in the body like rheumatoid arthritis, another condition called dermatomyositis, an inflammation of the muscles. Both have been linked to an increased rate of cancer, Cline says. The excess weight creates a generation of signaling molecules, which control the growth factor in our bodies, that are altered, she says. We already know that weight influences things such as heart disease and diabetes. When Cline talks to patients about their weight, she tries to acknowledge that losing weight is hard, while also acknowledging that she's noticed a change in their body mass index. She's often had to have this conversation with breast cancer survivors who want to be able to stay cancer-free. She talks to them about excess weight influencing their chances at remission. She acknowledges: "This is uncomfortable. I don't want to say it, and you may not want to hear it. I'm not trying to be judgmental here." It also might feel daunting to think about getting down to an ideal weight. There are different classes of obesity, and sometimes just getting to a healthier form of obesity might make a big difference. "I'm not asking you to lose 100 pounds; even 10, 20 pounds can make a difference," she says, as researches have seen with diabetes and heart disease. Cline knows that not only is weight loss hard it's also confusing. Think about butter and how it was seen as bad for us and were told we should choose margarine. Now, it's considered better than margarine. Cline advocates for a healthy diet that is plant-based, with vegetables filling most of the plate. She also wants to remind people that exercise is also important and affects metabolism and hormones in good way. | Texas has one of the highest rates of cancers related to excess body weight. | ctrlsum | 0 | https://www.statesman.com/news/20190120/why-do-texans-need-to-worry-about-unhealthy-weight-and-cancer | 0.385791 |
Why do Texans need to worry about unhealthy weight and cancer? | Texas is No. 1 in something we don't want to be known for. : the highest rates of cancers that can be attributed to excessive body weight, according to data from a report from the American Cancer Society and published in JAMA Oncology (Journal of the American Medical Association). Those cancers include ones of these places: where the stomach and esophagus connect, colorectum, liver, gallbladder, pancreas, female breasts, main part of the uterus, ovary, kidney, renal pelvis and thyroid. About 1 in 17 cancers in the U.S. are known to be related to excess body weight. It's a good reminder to keep that New Year's resolution to be healthier in 2019. We don't know for sure, says Mika Cline, an oncologist with Texas Oncology. "We don't know if it has something to do with ethnic ratio or male to female ratio." Women in the U.S. have a rate of cancers related to excess body weight of 9.6 percent of all cancers. Men in the U.S. have a rate of 4.7 percent of cancers related to excess body weight. In Texas, the overall rate of these cancers was 8.1 percent. Alaska was next at 7.9 percent, followed by Indiana at 7.7 percent. Texas also had the highest number of men with these cancers: 6 percent. What we do know is that there is evidence that excess weight and cancer have a relationship, Cline says. Excess weight might be related to hormone levels, and hormones impact certain cancers such as prostate, breast and endometrial. We also know that excess weight creates a state of inflammation in the body like rheumatoid arthritis, another condition called dermatomyositis, an inflammation of the muscles. Both have been linked to an increased rate of cancer, Cline says. The excess weight creates a generation of signaling molecules, which control the growth factor in our bodies, that are altered, she says. We already know that weight influences things such as heart disease and diabetes. When Cline talks to patients about their weight, she tries to acknowledge that losing weight is hard, while also acknowledging that she's noticed a change in their body mass index. She's often had to have this conversation with breast cancer survivors who want to be able to stay cancer-free. She talks to them about excess weight influencing their chances at remission. She acknowledges: "This is uncomfortable. I don't want to say it, and you may not want to hear it. I'm not trying to be judgmental here." It also might feel daunting to think about getting down to an ideal weight. There are different classes of obesity, and sometimes just getting to a healthier form of obesity might make a big difference. "I'm not asking you to lose 100 pounds; even 10, 20 pounds can make a difference," she says, as researches have seen with diabetes and heart disease. Cline knows that not only is weight loss hard it's also confusing. Think about butter and how it was seen as bad for us and were told we should choose margarine. Now, it's considered better than margarine. Cline advocates for a healthy diet that is plant-based, with vegetables filling most of the plate. She also wants to remind people that exercise is also important and affects metabolism and hormones in good way. | Texas has one of the highest rates of cancers related to excess body weight. Excess weight has been linked to an increased rate of cancer, an oncologist says. | ctrlsum | 1 | https://www.statesman.com/news/20190120/why-do-texans-need-to-worry-about-unhealthy-weight-and-cancer | 0.515031 |
Why do Texans need to worry about unhealthy weight and cancer? | Texas is No. 1 in something we don't want to be known for. : the highest rates of cancers that can be attributed to excessive body weight, according to data from a report from the American Cancer Society and published in JAMA Oncology (Journal of the American Medical Association). Those cancers include ones of these places: where the stomach and esophagus connect, colorectum, liver, gallbladder, pancreas, female breasts, main part of the uterus, ovary, kidney, renal pelvis and thyroid. About 1 in 17 cancers in the U.S. are known to be related to excess body weight. It's a good reminder to keep that New Year's resolution to be healthier in 2019. We don't know for sure, says Mika Cline, an oncologist with Texas Oncology. "We don't know if it has something to do with ethnic ratio or male to female ratio." Women in the U.S. have a rate of cancers related to excess body weight of 9.6 percent of all cancers. Men in the U.S. have a rate of 4.7 percent of cancers related to excess body weight. In Texas, the overall rate of these cancers was 8.1 percent. Alaska was next at 7.9 percent, followed by Indiana at 7.7 percent. Texas also had the highest number of men with these cancers: 6 percent. What we do know is that there is evidence that excess weight and cancer have a relationship, Cline says. Excess weight might be related to hormone levels, and hormones impact certain cancers such as prostate, breast and endometrial. We also know that excess weight creates a state of inflammation in the body like rheumatoid arthritis, another condition called dermatomyositis, an inflammation of the muscles. Both have been linked to an increased rate of cancer, Cline says. The excess weight creates a generation of signaling molecules, which control the growth factor in our bodies, that are altered, she says. We already know that weight influences things such as heart disease and diabetes. When Cline talks to patients about their weight, she tries to acknowledge that losing weight is hard, while also acknowledging that she's noticed a change in their body mass index. She's often had to have this conversation with breast cancer survivors who want to be able to stay cancer-free. She talks to them about excess weight influencing their chances at remission. She acknowledges: "This is uncomfortable. I don't want to say it, and you may not want to hear it. I'm not trying to be judgmental here." It also might feel daunting to think about getting down to an ideal weight. There are different classes of obesity, and sometimes just getting to a healthier form of obesity might make a big difference. "I'm not asking you to lose 100 pounds; even 10, 20 pounds can make a difference," she says, as researches have seen with diabetes and heart disease. Cline knows that not only is weight loss hard it's also confusing. Think about butter and how it was seen as bad for us and were told we should choose margarine. Now, it's considered better than margarine. Cline advocates for a healthy diet that is plant-based, with vegetables filling most of the plate. She also wants to remind people that exercise is also important and affects metabolism and hormones in good way. | Texas has one of the highest rates of cancers related to excess body weight. Excess weight has been linked to an increased rate of cancer, an oncologist says. The doctor recommends a healthy diet, exercise and a low-calorie, low-fat diet. | ctrlsum | 2 | https://www.statesman.com/news/20190120/why-do-texans-need-to-worry-about-unhealthy-weight-and-cancer | 0.560505 |
How Many Playoff Comebacks Does Tom Brady Have? | Tom Brady isn't a stranger to playoff comeback wins. Brady, who already has eight postseason come-from-behind victories, led the New England Patriots to his ninth with a 3731 overtime AFC Championship win over the Kansas City Chiefs. The Patriots led for most of the game before the Chiefs took a 2824 lead with 2:04 left in the fourth quarter. Brady led New England on a 65-yard touchdown drive to retake a 3128 lead before Kansas City tied it up to send the game to overtime. The Chiefs never saw the football in overtime, as Brady marched his team 75 yards down the field for the win and a ticket to Atlanta for Super Bowl LIII. Brady's last postseason comeback win also occurred in the AFC Championship game, when the Patriots overcome a 2010 deficit in the fourth quarter to win 2420. The Patriots, playing in their third straight Super Bowl, will face the Los Angeles Rams on Feb. 3. | Tom Brady led the New England Patriots to a 3731 overtime win over the Kansas City Chiefs. It was Brady's ninth postseason comeback win. | pegasus | 0 | https://www.si.com/nfl/2019/01/20/how-many-playoff-comebacks-does-tom-brady-have-afc-championship-game | 0.298362 |
How Many Playoff Comebacks Does Tom Brady Have? | Tom Brady isn't a stranger to playoff comeback wins. Brady, who already has eight postseason come-from-behind victories, led the New England Patriots to his ninth with a 3731 overtime AFC Championship win over the Kansas City Chiefs. The Patriots led for most of the game before the Chiefs took a 2824 lead with 2:04 left in the fourth quarter. Brady led New England on a 65-yard touchdown drive to retake a 3128 lead before Kansas City tied it up to send the game to overtime. The Chiefs never saw the football in overtime, as Brady marched his team 75 yards down the field for the win and a ticket to Atlanta for Super Bowl LIII. Brady's last postseason comeback win also occurred in the AFC Championship game, when the Patriots overcome a 2010 deficit in the fourth quarter to win 2420. The Patriots, playing in their third straight Super Bowl, will face the Los Angeles Rams on Feb. 3. | Tom Brady led the New England Patriots to a 3731 overtime win over the Kansas City Chiefs. It was Brady's ninth postseason comeback win. The Patriots will play the Los Angeles Rams in Super Bowl LIII. | pegasus | 1 | https://www.si.com/nfl/2019/01/20/how-many-playoff-comebacks-does-tom-brady-have-afc-championship-game | 0.309171 |
How Many Playoff Comebacks Does Tom Brady Have? | Tom Brady isn't a stranger to playoff comeback wins. Brady, who already has eight postseason come-from-behind victories, led the New England Patriots to his ninth with a 3731 overtime AFC Championship win over the Kansas City Chiefs. The Patriots led for most of the game before the Chiefs took a 2824 lead with 2:04 left in the fourth quarter. Brady led New England on a 65-yard touchdown drive to retake a 3128 lead before Kansas City tied it up to send the game to overtime. The Chiefs never saw the football in overtime, as Brady marched his team 75 yards down the field for the win and a ticket to Atlanta for Super Bowl LIII. Brady's last postseason comeback win also occurred in the AFC Championship game, when the Patriots overcome a 2010 deficit in the fourth quarter to win 2420. The Patriots, playing in their third straight Super Bowl, will face the Los Angeles Rams on Feb. 3. | Tom Brady led the New England Patriots to a 3731 overtime win over the Kansas City Chiefs. The win was Brady's ninth come-from-behind victory in the postseason. The Patriots will play the Los Angeles Rams in the Super Bowl on February 3. | pegasus | 2 | https://www.si.com/nfl/2019/01/20/how-many-playoff-comebacks-does-tom-brady-have-afc-championship-game | 0.157398 |
Who is the Youngest Coach to Ever Win a Super Bowl? | In just his second season as an NFL head coach, Sean McVay will have a chance to lead the Los Angeles Rams to their first Super Bowl title since 2000. He'll also have the chance to be the youngest head coach ever to win it. McVay, at 32 years old, is four years younger than the NFL's current youngest Super Bowl-winning head coach: Mike Tomlin of the Pittsburgh Steelers. On Feb. 1, 2009, Tomlin became the youngest head coach to win the Super Bowl when the Steelers defeated the Arizona Cardinals in Super Bowl XLIII, when he was just 36 years old. Like McVay this year, Tomlin was also in just his second year as the team's head coach. The previous record was held by Jon Gruden, who was 39 when he won Super Bowl XXXVII with the Tampa Bay Buccaneers. The Rams will play Tom Brady and the New England Patriots on Feb. 3. Kickoff is set for 6:30 p.m. ET. | Sean McVay is four years younger than the NFL's current youngest Super Bowl-winning head coach: Mike Tomlin of the Pittsburgh Steelers. The Rams will play Tom Brady and the New England Patriots on Feb. 3. | bart | 1 | https://www.si.com/nfl/2019/01/20/youngest-coach-ever-win-super-bowl-sean-mcvay-mike-tomlin | 0.152616 |
Who is the Youngest Coach to Ever Win a Super Bowl? | In just his second season as an NFL head coach, Sean McVay will have a chance to lead the Los Angeles Rams to their first Super Bowl title since 2000. He'll also have the chance to be the youngest head coach ever to win it. McVay, at 32 years old, is four years younger than the NFL's current youngest Super Bowl-winning head coach: Mike Tomlin of the Pittsburgh Steelers. On Feb. 1, 2009, Tomlin became the youngest head coach to win the Super Bowl when the Steelers defeated the Arizona Cardinals in Super Bowl XLIII, when he was just 36 years old. Like McVay this year, Tomlin was also in just his second year as the team's head coach. The previous record was held by Jon Gruden, who was 39 when he won Super Bowl XXXVII with the Tampa Bay Buccaneers. The Rams will play Tom Brady and the New England Patriots on Feb. 3. Kickoff is set for 6:30 p.m. ET. | Sean McVay is four years younger than the NFL's current youngest Super Bowl-winning head coach: Mike Tomlin of the Pittsburgh Steelers. The Rams will play Tom Brady and the New England Patriots on Feb. 3. Kickoff is set for 6:30 p.m. ET. | bart | 2 | https://www.si.com/nfl/2019/01/20/youngest-coach-ever-win-super-bowl-sean-mcvay-mike-tomlin | 0.162342 |
Why are Ohio's medical marijuana prices so high? | CLOSE Ohio's seed to sale process for producing medical marijuana. They weren't happy with the answer: $50 cash for a small plastic container holding 2.83 grams of dried marijuana bud, or just under $500 an ounce. "I'll buy one today to say I did it, but I can get it a lot cheaper than that elsewhere," said one man who declined to be named. Michigan dispensaries charge between $150 and $300 an ounce, depending on the variety, or strain. Patients say that's similar to prices for illicit marijuana in Ohio. Dispensaries sold 8.7 pounds of marijuana on Ohio's first day at an average price of$538 per ounce, according to sales figures released Thursday. There are a few reasons. Regulated and tested Marijuana sold in legal markets have a hard time competing with product sold on the black market for several reasons. Legal marijuana businesses have to comply with regulations for pesticides, tracking every plant with sophisticated software, security and more. They also pay taxes, and because marijuana remains an illegal substance on the federal level, they can't deduct expenses the way other businesses can. Ohio law requires every medical marijuana product to be tested by an independent state-licensed lab. There are only two in operation. The labs test for pesticides, mold and other contaminants. They also test for amounts of various marijuana compounds including THC, which generates a high, and cannabidiol, or CBD, which doesn't. Ohio's program allows individuals with one of 21 medical conditions to buy and use marijuana if recommended to them by a physician. Eligible conditions include AIDS, cancer and others where consumers' immune systems could suffer from tainted marijuana. Limited supply Ohio dispensaries reported lines and a steady flow of customers on opening day. (Photo: Daniel Carson/The News-Messenger) The state has licensed 29 businesses to grow marijuana, but only 14 have finished building their facilities and been approved to start growing. None of the state-licensed processors are operating, so oils, lotions, patches, edibles and other products are not yet available. The four dispensaries that opened Wednesday sold only dried marijuana flower, or bud, from a handful of medical marijuana cultivators. "If I wanted to open today, I had to buy it from them," said Mike Petrella, who owns Ohio Valley Natural Relief dispensary in Wintersville. Dispensaries set prices based on what they pay for the product; state regulators have no authority to limit or change prices. Most of the varieties sold Wednesday were priced the same. Officials from the first four open dispensaries say prices should go down as more cultivators harvest and compete. Some dispensary owners plan to offer discounts to veterans, senior citizens and others. The Forest Sandusky offers a 20 percent discount to veterans. More regulations In Michigan and other states, flower can be packaged in the dispensary. Not in Ohio. Growers and product manufacturers are the only ones who can package products, and dispensaries have to sell products in the original, sealed packaging. Ohio has some of the highest marijuana business licensing fees in the country $200,000 a year for large-scale growers and $70,000 every two years for dispensary owners. Businesses pay additional fees to the state to register employees and pay a $100 fee for each strain or dosage of a product. Theres a higher cost of production to adhere to all the regulatory requirements and to deliver that product to the consumer, said Jason Erkes, spokesman for Cresco Labs, which operates CY+ Dispensary. Cresco also has an Ohio cultivation license and operates medical marijuana businesses in Illinois and Pennsylvania. Prices in Illinois averaged $450 an ounce during the first week of sales in 2015. Current prices there range from $240 to $420 an ounce, according to dispensary websites. Pennsylvania started selling flower in August 2018, and prices are now hovering around $300 to $480 an ounce, according to dispensary websites. The Ohio tenth One specific regulation sets Ohio apart from the 33 states that allow cannabis for medicinal use. Rules set by the Ohio State Pharmacy Board, which oversees dispensaries, require marijuana flower and infused products to be packaged in certain amounts, called "whole day units." A unit of dried flower is 2.83 grams, or 1/10th of an ounce. State law limits patients to buying and possessing no more than a "90-day supply," but didn't define it in law. The pharmacy board decided to set that number at 8 ounces of dried flower or an equivalent amount of THC in marijuana products. The limits came from a panel of pharmacists who reviewed clinical research about the marijuana compound. No other state has calculated limits this way. The only product sold Wednesday was little containers with one "Ohio tenth" of buds inside. On Tuesday, pharmacy board spokeswoman Ali Simon said flower had to be packaged in 2.83 gram amounts. On Thursday, Simon clarified it can be packaged in greater amounts, as long as the total is made up of whole daily units. Buckeye Relief, a large-scale cultivator in Northeast Ohio, planned to start packaging in larger quantities after the first day of sales. Im sure were all trying to drive costs down for patients over the long haul, Buckeye Relief CEO Andy Rayburn said. Here's what you need to know Read or Share this story: https://www.cincinnati.com/story/money/2019/01/20/why-ohios-medical-marijuana-prices-high/2602221002/ | Ohio dispensaries sold 8.7 pounds of marijuana on Ohio's first day at an average price of$538 per ounce. The state has licensed 29 businesses to grow marijuana, but only 14 have finished building their facilities and been approved to start growing. | pegasus | 1 | https://www.cincinnati.com/story/money/2019/01/20/why-ohios-medical-marijuana-prices-high/2602221002/ | 0.15307 |
Why are Ohio's medical marijuana prices so high? | CLOSE Ohio's seed to sale process for producing medical marijuana. They weren't happy with the answer: $50 cash for a small plastic container holding 2.83 grams of dried marijuana bud, or just under $500 an ounce. "I'll buy one today to say I did it, but I can get it a lot cheaper than that elsewhere," said one man who declined to be named. Michigan dispensaries charge between $150 and $300 an ounce, depending on the variety, or strain. Patients say that's similar to prices for illicit marijuana in Ohio. Dispensaries sold 8.7 pounds of marijuana on Ohio's first day at an average price of$538 per ounce, according to sales figures released Thursday. There are a few reasons. Regulated and tested Marijuana sold in legal markets have a hard time competing with product sold on the black market for several reasons. Legal marijuana businesses have to comply with regulations for pesticides, tracking every plant with sophisticated software, security and more. They also pay taxes, and because marijuana remains an illegal substance on the federal level, they can't deduct expenses the way other businesses can. Ohio law requires every medical marijuana product to be tested by an independent state-licensed lab. There are only two in operation. The labs test for pesticides, mold and other contaminants. They also test for amounts of various marijuana compounds including THC, which generates a high, and cannabidiol, or CBD, which doesn't. Ohio's program allows individuals with one of 21 medical conditions to buy and use marijuana if recommended to them by a physician. Eligible conditions include AIDS, cancer and others where consumers' immune systems could suffer from tainted marijuana. Limited supply Ohio dispensaries reported lines and a steady flow of customers on opening day. (Photo: Daniel Carson/The News-Messenger) The state has licensed 29 businesses to grow marijuana, but only 14 have finished building their facilities and been approved to start growing. None of the state-licensed processors are operating, so oils, lotions, patches, edibles and other products are not yet available. The four dispensaries that opened Wednesday sold only dried marijuana flower, or bud, from a handful of medical marijuana cultivators. "If I wanted to open today, I had to buy it from them," said Mike Petrella, who owns Ohio Valley Natural Relief dispensary in Wintersville. Dispensaries set prices based on what they pay for the product; state regulators have no authority to limit or change prices. Most of the varieties sold Wednesday were priced the same. Officials from the first four open dispensaries say prices should go down as more cultivators harvest and compete. Some dispensary owners plan to offer discounts to veterans, senior citizens and others. The Forest Sandusky offers a 20 percent discount to veterans. More regulations In Michigan and other states, flower can be packaged in the dispensary. Not in Ohio. Growers and product manufacturers are the only ones who can package products, and dispensaries have to sell products in the original, sealed packaging. Ohio has some of the highest marijuana business licensing fees in the country $200,000 a year for large-scale growers and $70,000 every two years for dispensary owners. Businesses pay additional fees to the state to register employees and pay a $100 fee for each strain or dosage of a product. Theres a higher cost of production to adhere to all the regulatory requirements and to deliver that product to the consumer, said Jason Erkes, spokesman for Cresco Labs, which operates CY+ Dispensary. Cresco also has an Ohio cultivation license and operates medical marijuana businesses in Illinois and Pennsylvania. Prices in Illinois averaged $450 an ounce during the first week of sales in 2015. Current prices there range from $240 to $420 an ounce, according to dispensary websites. Pennsylvania started selling flower in August 2018, and prices are now hovering around $300 to $480 an ounce, according to dispensary websites. The Ohio tenth One specific regulation sets Ohio apart from the 33 states that allow cannabis for medicinal use. Rules set by the Ohio State Pharmacy Board, which oversees dispensaries, require marijuana flower and infused products to be packaged in certain amounts, called "whole day units." A unit of dried flower is 2.83 grams, or 1/10th of an ounce. State law limits patients to buying and possessing no more than a "90-day supply," but didn't define it in law. The pharmacy board decided to set that number at 8 ounces of dried flower or an equivalent amount of THC in marijuana products. The limits came from a panel of pharmacists who reviewed clinical research about the marijuana compound. No other state has calculated limits this way. The only product sold Wednesday was little containers with one "Ohio tenth" of buds inside. On Tuesday, pharmacy board spokeswoman Ali Simon said flower had to be packaged in 2.83 gram amounts. On Thursday, Simon clarified it can be packaged in greater amounts, as long as the total is made up of whole daily units. Buckeye Relief, a large-scale cultivator in Northeast Ohio, planned to start packaging in larger quantities after the first day of sales. Im sure were all trying to drive costs down for patients over the long haul, Buckeye Relief CEO Andy Rayburn said. Here's what you need to know Read or Share this story: https://www.cincinnati.com/story/money/2019/01/20/why-ohios-medical-marijuana-prices-high/2602221002/ | Dispensaries sold 8.7 pounds of marijuana on Ohio's first day at an average price of$538 per ounce. Michigan dispensaries charge between $150 and $300 an ounce, depending on the variety, or strain. Ohio law requires every medical marijuana product to be tested by an independent state-licensed lab. | bart | 2 | https://www.cincinnati.com/story/money/2019/01/20/why-ohios-medical-marijuana-prices-high/2602221002/ | 0.135202 |
Can Artificial Intelligence Be Biased? | Introduction In pursuit of automation-driven efficiencies, the rapidly evolving artificial intelligence (AI) tools and techniques (such as neural networks, machine-learning, predictive analytics, speech recognition, natural-language processing and more) are now routinely used across nations: its governments, industries, organizations and academia (NGIOA) for navigation, translation, behavior modeling, robotic control, risk management, security, decision making and many other applications. As AI is becoming democratized, these evolving intelligent algorithms are now rapidly becoming prevalent in most, if not all, aspects of human and machine decision-making. While Decision Utilities like intelligent algorithms have been in use for many years, there are rising concerns about the general lack of algorithmic understanding, usage practices, the rapidly penetrating bias in automated decisions, and the lack of transparency and accountability. As a result, ensuring integrity, transparency and trust in algorithmic decision-making is becoming a complex challenge for the creators of algorithms with huge implications for the future of society. Human versus Machine Decision-Making Processes Irrespective of cyberspace, geospace or space (CGS), since technology revolutions are driven not just by accidental discovery but also by societal needs, the question we all individually and collectively need to first and foremost evaluate is whether there really is a need for decision-making algorithmsand if yes, where and why. Artificial intelligence tools and techniques are increasingly expanding and enriching decision support not only by coordinating diverse data sources delivery in a timely and efficient manner but also by analyzing evolving data sources, trends, providing defined forecasts, developing data consistency, quantifying uncertainty of all data variables, anticipating the human or machine users data needs, providing information to the human or machine user in the most appropriate forms, and suggesting decisive courses of all possible action based on the intelligence gathered. Understandably, this is being welcomedsince in a fast-changing digital age environment, it is becoming difficult for human decision-makers to keep up, analyze the mountains of growing data in front of them, and make informed and intelligent decisions. However, even for an algorithmic decision-making process, there are complex challenges to reach an informed decision. For example, it is difficult to know whether decision-making algorithms will be able to make effective decisions with the current computing and data analytics infrastructure and processing capability. While it seems very likely that artificial intelligence will become universal in most, if not all, aspects of decision-making in the near future, it will be interesting to see how the emerging competition between human decision-making versus AI decision-making will play out. Algorithmic Engineering Process and Penetration of Bias While there are growing concerns about machine learning decision-making models, it seems AI is being woven into the very fabric of human society and everything individuals and entities do across nations: its government, industries, organizations and academia (NGIOA) in cyberspace, geospace and space (CGS). Moreover, it needs to be understood that the rapidly evolving machine-learning model is not a static piece of code since we are constantly feeding it data from diverse sources and are constantly training, re-training and fine-tuning it to how predictions can be made. In each of these data journey steps, humans at the moment play a significant and influential role. As a result, while machine-learning models are becoming almost like a living, breathing thing with a growing dynamic data ecosystem from CGS around it, the very involvement of humans brings with it the same complex human bias. Since, we are trying to re-define and re-design systems that brings us more trust and transparency, there is a clear need to promote equality, transparency and accountability in algorithm design and development for decision-makingand to ensure that data transparency, training, review and remediation are being considered throughout the entire algorithmic engineering process. According to ProPublica, an investigative journalism organization, a computer program used by US courts across the nation has been reported to be biased against black prisoners. The program, named the Correctional Offender Management Profiling for Alternative Sanctions, mistakenly flagged black defendants as likely to reoffend at almost twice the rate as white defendants (45% to 24%). The program likely factored in the higher rates of arrest for black people into its predictions but was not able to escape the same racial biases that contributed to those higher levels of arrests. Bias has also been reported in granting credit to home buyers, even going as far as to potentially violate the Fair Housing Act. Rates of defaulting may be higher in some neighborhoods, but an algorithm using this information to make black and white calls runs the risk of heading towards red-lining territory. Examples abound, with plenty of cases to show AI and technology to be both sexist and racist. Lets not forget Googles search algorithm including black people in the results of a search on gorilla. While decision-making algorithms are inherently not biased and algorithmic decision-making depends on a number of variables -- including how the software is designed, developed, deployed and the quality, integrity and representativeness of the underlying data sources -- there is a need for a new approach to define and design decision-making algorithms. We perhaps need adaptive computing that integrates intelligence gathering into its very fabric and which does not rely on humans training the algorithms in how to make decisions. Since it is important to evaluate what the implications will be if bias penetrates decision-making algorithmsit brings us to evaluating further whether data protection safeguards can be built into the algorithms from the earliest stages of development to prevent bias from penetrating them. It is important to address this as the very foundations of the systems that are being re-defined and re-designed depend on it. Now, since it is not possible to interrogate algorithms, and there are no effective rules or regulations around decision-making algorithms that focus on the algorithmic accountability, how to remove bias remains a complex challenge facing society. Acknowledging this emerging reality, Risk Group initiated the much-needed discussion on Algorithmic Decision-Making with Prof. (Dr.) Steve Omohundro, President at Possibility Research. Disclosure: Risk Group LLC is my company. Risk Group discusses Algorithmic Decision- Making with Prof. (Dr.) Steve Omohundro, President at Possibility Research, based in CA, United States. Perhaps the key to making decision-making algorithms work for everyone on a fair and balanced playing field is to build in accountability, responsibility, neutrality and outcomes from the very beginningright in the code. If not, without question, all the efforts that are being put in re-defining and re-designing the systems in cyberspace, geospace and space will bring no real value for society overall. Data: Nature, Sources, Efficiency The growing availability, volume and accumulation of diverse sources of data means it can be overwhelming for any human decision maker to effectively make decisionsirrespective of whether these are strategic decisions or tactical. Therefore, it is important to evaluate what role dynamic growing data plays in how the algorithms are structured to take into consideration the growing data input. So, while efficiency seems to be at the core of many emerging automation applications, the transparency and integrity of the data on which the algorithmic decisions are being made will be critical to ensure its accountability. The democratization of computing infrastructure allows anyone to build any algorithm any way they want. However, when it comes to its decision-making applications for systems at all levels: global, national or local (may it be government agencies, banks, credit agencies, courts, prisons, education institutions etc.,) there is a need for a global standard on the best practices to define and determine whose algorithm can be used for equality, fairness and objectivity. The question now is not just whether humans or machines will make decisionsrather it's about whether intelligent algorithms replacing humans in decision-making will bring with them the same biases of race, religion, class, gender and ideology that are harmful to society. The question today for each one of us to individually and collectively evaluate is whether intelligent algorithms are and will remain an aid to the human decision-making process or whether they will become the ultimate decision-makers. And if artificial intelligence becomes the decision-maker, what will be the implications of relinquishing decision-making control to intelligent machines--as the very use of automated AI based decision-making techniques raises challenges for humanity as a whole. | Artificial intelligence (AI) tools and techniques are now routinely used across nations. There are rising concerns about the general lack of algorithmic understanding, usage practices, the rapidly penetrating bias in automated decisions, and the lack of transparency. | bart | 1 | https://www.forbes.com/sites/cognitiveworld/2019/01/20/can-artificial-intelligence-be-biased/ | 0.209865 |
Can Artificial Intelligence Be Biased? | Introduction In pursuit of automation-driven efficiencies, the rapidly evolving artificial intelligence (AI) tools and techniques (such as neural networks, machine-learning, predictive analytics, speech recognition, natural-language processing and more) are now routinely used across nations: its governments, industries, organizations and academia (NGIOA) for navigation, translation, behavior modeling, robotic control, risk management, security, decision making and many other applications. As AI is becoming democratized, these evolving intelligent algorithms are now rapidly becoming prevalent in most, if not all, aspects of human and machine decision-making. While Decision Utilities like intelligent algorithms have been in use for many years, there are rising concerns about the general lack of algorithmic understanding, usage practices, the rapidly penetrating bias in automated decisions, and the lack of transparency and accountability. As a result, ensuring integrity, transparency and trust in algorithmic decision-making is becoming a complex challenge for the creators of algorithms with huge implications for the future of society. Human versus Machine Decision-Making Processes Irrespective of cyberspace, geospace or space (CGS), since technology revolutions are driven not just by accidental discovery but also by societal needs, the question we all individually and collectively need to first and foremost evaluate is whether there really is a need for decision-making algorithmsand if yes, where and why. Artificial intelligence tools and techniques are increasingly expanding and enriching decision support not only by coordinating diverse data sources delivery in a timely and efficient manner but also by analyzing evolving data sources, trends, providing defined forecasts, developing data consistency, quantifying uncertainty of all data variables, anticipating the human or machine users data needs, providing information to the human or machine user in the most appropriate forms, and suggesting decisive courses of all possible action based on the intelligence gathered. Understandably, this is being welcomedsince in a fast-changing digital age environment, it is becoming difficult for human decision-makers to keep up, analyze the mountains of growing data in front of them, and make informed and intelligent decisions. However, even for an algorithmic decision-making process, there are complex challenges to reach an informed decision. For example, it is difficult to know whether decision-making algorithms will be able to make effective decisions with the current computing and data analytics infrastructure and processing capability. While it seems very likely that artificial intelligence will become universal in most, if not all, aspects of decision-making in the near future, it will be interesting to see how the emerging competition between human decision-making versus AI decision-making will play out. Algorithmic Engineering Process and Penetration of Bias While there are growing concerns about machine learning decision-making models, it seems AI is being woven into the very fabric of human society and everything individuals and entities do across nations: its government, industries, organizations and academia (NGIOA) in cyberspace, geospace and space (CGS). Moreover, it needs to be understood that the rapidly evolving machine-learning model is not a static piece of code since we are constantly feeding it data from diverse sources and are constantly training, re-training and fine-tuning it to how predictions can be made. In each of these data journey steps, humans at the moment play a significant and influential role. As a result, while machine-learning models are becoming almost like a living, breathing thing with a growing dynamic data ecosystem from CGS around it, the very involvement of humans brings with it the same complex human bias. Since, we are trying to re-define and re-design systems that brings us more trust and transparency, there is a clear need to promote equality, transparency and accountability in algorithm design and development for decision-makingand to ensure that data transparency, training, review and remediation are being considered throughout the entire algorithmic engineering process. According to ProPublica, an investigative journalism organization, a computer program used by US courts across the nation has been reported to be biased against black prisoners. The program, named the Correctional Offender Management Profiling for Alternative Sanctions, mistakenly flagged black defendants as likely to reoffend at almost twice the rate as white defendants (45% to 24%). The program likely factored in the higher rates of arrest for black people into its predictions but was not able to escape the same racial biases that contributed to those higher levels of arrests. Bias has also been reported in granting credit to home buyers, even going as far as to potentially violate the Fair Housing Act. Rates of defaulting may be higher in some neighborhoods, but an algorithm using this information to make black and white calls runs the risk of heading towards red-lining territory. Examples abound, with plenty of cases to show AI and technology to be both sexist and racist. Lets not forget Googles search algorithm including black people in the results of a search on gorilla. While decision-making algorithms are inherently not biased and algorithmic decision-making depends on a number of variables -- including how the software is designed, developed, deployed and the quality, integrity and representativeness of the underlying data sources -- there is a need for a new approach to define and design decision-making algorithms. We perhaps need adaptive computing that integrates intelligence gathering into its very fabric and which does not rely on humans training the algorithms in how to make decisions. Since it is important to evaluate what the implications will be if bias penetrates decision-making algorithmsit brings us to evaluating further whether data protection safeguards can be built into the algorithms from the earliest stages of development to prevent bias from penetrating them. It is important to address this as the very foundations of the systems that are being re-defined and re-designed depend on it. Now, since it is not possible to interrogate algorithms, and there are no effective rules or regulations around decision-making algorithms that focus on the algorithmic accountability, how to remove bias remains a complex challenge facing society. Acknowledging this emerging reality, Risk Group initiated the much-needed discussion on Algorithmic Decision-Making with Prof. (Dr.) Steve Omohundro, President at Possibility Research. Disclosure: Risk Group LLC is my company. Risk Group discusses Algorithmic Decision- Making with Prof. (Dr.) Steve Omohundro, President at Possibility Research, based in CA, United States. Perhaps the key to making decision-making algorithms work for everyone on a fair and balanced playing field is to build in accountability, responsibility, neutrality and outcomes from the very beginningright in the code. If not, without question, all the efforts that are being put in re-defining and re-designing the systems in cyberspace, geospace and space will bring no real value for society overall. Data: Nature, Sources, Efficiency The growing availability, volume and accumulation of diverse sources of data means it can be overwhelming for any human decision maker to effectively make decisionsirrespective of whether these are strategic decisions or tactical. Therefore, it is important to evaluate what role dynamic growing data plays in how the algorithms are structured to take into consideration the growing data input. So, while efficiency seems to be at the core of many emerging automation applications, the transparency and integrity of the data on which the algorithmic decisions are being made will be critical to ensure its accountability. The democratization of computing infrastructure allows anyone to build any algorithm any way they want. However, when it comes to its decision-making applications for systems at all levels: global, national or local (may it be government agencies, banks, credit agencies, courts, prisons, education institutions etc.,) there is a need for a global standard on the best practices to define and determine whose algorithm can be used for equality, fairness and objectivity. The question now is not just whether humans or machines will make decisionsrather it's about whether intelligent algorithms replacing humans in decision-making will bring with them the same biases of race, religion, class, gender and ideology that are harmful to society. The question today for each one of us to individually and collectively evaluate is whether intelligent algorithms are and will remain an aid to the human decision-making process or whether they will become the ultimate decision-makers. And if artificial intelligence becomes the decision-maker, what will be the implications of relinquishing decision-making control to intelligent machines--as the very use of automated AI based decision-making techniques raises challenges for humanity as a whole. | Artificial intelligence (AI) tools and techniques are now routinely used across nations for navigation, translation, behavior modeling, robotic control, risk management, security, decision making and many other applications. There are rising concerns about the general lack of algorithmic understanding, usage practices, the rapidly penetrating bias in automated decisions, and lack of transparency and accountability. | bart | 2 | https://www.forbes.com/sites/cognitiveworld/2019/01/20/can-artificial-intelligence-be-biased/ | 0.178676 |
Which NFL Player has the Most Super Bowl Appearances? | Tom Brady will be appearing in his ninth Super Bowl after leading the Patriots to an AFC Championship win over the Chiefs on Sunday. With the win, Brady holds his spot atop the list of NFL players with the most Super Bowl appearances. Brady and pass rusher Charles Haley have both won five Super Bowl ringsthe most of any player in NFL history. Behind Brady, there's nose tackle Mike Lodish, who has played in six Super Bowls during his 11-year career. Wide receiver Don Beebe also appeared in six Super Bowls, winning one with the Packers. He only played in three of the games though. A number of players have appeared in five Super Bowls, including Colts kicker Adam Vinatieri, who has won four titles. Quarterback John Elway has also appeared in five Super Bowls, winning twice. Three players have appeared in five Super Bowls but won none: Linebacker Cornelius Bennett, Guard Glenn Parker and quarterback Gale Gilbert who lost five straight Super Bowls. The Patriots will play in their ninth Super Bowl in 18 years when they face the Rams on Feb. 3. | Tom Brady has appeared in nine Super Bowls. | ctrlsum | 0 | https://www.si.com/nfl/2019/01/20/which-nfl-player-has-most-super-bowl-appearances | 0.340702 |
Which NFL Player has the Most Super Bowl Appearances? | Tom Brady will be appearing in his ninth Super Bowl after leading the Patriots to an AFC Championship win over the Chiefs on Sunday. With the win, Brady holds his spot atop the list of NFL players with the most Super Bowl appearances. Brady and pass rusher Charles Haley have both won five Super Bowl ringsthe most of any player in NFL history. Behind Brady, there's nose tackle Mike Lodish, who has played in six Super Bowls during his 11-year career. Wide receiver Don Beebe also appeared in six Super Bowls, winning one with the Packers. He only played in three of the games though. A number of players have appeared in five Super Bowls, including Colts kicker Adam Vinatieri, who has won four titles. Quarterback John Elway has also appeared in five Super Bowls, winning twice. Three players have appeared in five Super Bowls but won none: Linebacker Cornelius Bennett, Guard Glenn Parker and quarterback Gale Gilbert who lost five straight Super Bowls. The Patriots will play in their ninth Super Bowl in 18 years when they face the Rams on Feb. 3. | Tom Brady has won five Super Bowl rings, the most of any player in NFL history. The Patriots will play in their ninth Super Bowl in 18 years on Feb. 3. | ctrlsum | 1 | https://www.si.com/nfl/2019/01/20/which-nfl-player-has-most-super-bowl-appearances | 0.4062 |
Which NFL Player has the Most Super Bowl Appearances? | Tom Brady will be appearing in his ninth Super Bowl after leading the Patriots to an AFC Championship win over the Chiefs on Sunday. With the win, Brady holds his spot atop the list of NFL players with the most Super Bowl appearances. Brady and pass rusher Charles Haley have both won five Super Bowl ringsthe most of any player in NFL history. Behind Brady, there's nose tackle Mike Lodish, who has played in six Super Bowls during his 11-year career. Wide receiver Don Beebe also appeared in six Super Bowls, winning one with the Packers. He only played in three of the games though. A number of players have appeared in five Super Bowls, including Colts kicker Adam Vinatieri, who has won four titles. Quarterback John Elway has also appeared in five Super Bowls, winning twice. Three players have appeared in five Super Bowls but won none: Linebacker Cornelius Bennett, Guard Glenn Parker and quarterback Gale Gilbert who lost five straight Super Bowls. The Patriots will play in their ninth Super Bowl in 18 years when they face the Rams on Feb. 3. | Tom Brady has won five Super Bowl rings, the most of any player in NFL history. The Patriots will play in their ninth Super Bowl in 18 years when they face the Rams on Feb. 3 in New Orleans. The Super Bowl is the most prestigious football event in the world. | ctrlsum | 2 | https://www.si.com/nfl/2019/01/20/which-nfl-player-has-most-super-bowl-appearances | 0.432217 |
Should I stop pension contributions to get a bigger mortgage? | Q I have a question based on the article you wrote in 2015. I am a deputy head teacher. My partner and I are having strong arguments over me stopping my pension, which I want to do so that I can get the best possible mortgage by providing three payslips clear of pension contributions. We are looking to increase the size of our house in north London as we have a young family. My partner doesnt have a pension as she thinks they are the devil. She is freelance and so her payslips wont be contributing to the mortgage process. It appears most mortgage firms do not overlook your pension payments. MW A To repeat what I said in May 2015, I most certainly wouldnt advise anyone to cancel their pension contributions for a few months to boost their chances of getting a mortgage. Besides, there may be no point as a significant number of lenders dont ask about pension contributions. In addition, lenders ignore pension contributions deducted from salary as I assume yours are because they are already taken into account in the net pay figure on payslips, which areused to assess affordability. In addition, stopping contributions wont bump up the net pay figure by as much as you think because your tax bill goes up. Rather than stopping pension contributions, you should concentrate on reducing what you owe on other loans, including credit card debts. Also, if your partner fills in a tax return every year which she should if she doesnt pay tax through the PAYE (pay as you earn) system she can provide evidence of income to a prospective mortgage lender in the form of HM Revenue and Customs tax-assessment forms. So it doesnt make sense to exclude her from the mortgage process as her income could increase the amount you can borrow. Finally, Ill repeat what I said about using a mortgage adviser if you think your pension contributions are going to be a deal-breaker since an adviser can point you in the direction of a lender that will not take them into account. | My partner doesn't have a pension as she thinks they are the devil. She is freelance and so her payslips wont be contributing to the mortgage process. It appears most mortgage firms do not overlook your pension payments. Rather than stopping pension contributions, you should concentrate on reducing what you owe on other loans, including credit card debts. | bart | 2 | https://www.theguardian.com/money/2019/jan/21/should-i-stop-pension-contributions-to-get-a-bigger-mortgage | 0.109168 |
Can Software & Services Boost F5 Networks (FFIV) Q1 Earnings? | F5 Networks Inc. FFIV is set to report first-quarter fiscal 2019 results on Jan 23. The company surpassed the Zacks Consensus Estimate in each of the trailing four quarters, the average positive earnings surprise being 6.45%. In the last reported quarter, the companys non-GAAP earnings per share of $2.90 increased 18.9% year over year and surpassed the Zacks Consensus Estimate of $2.63. Moreover, F5 Networks revenues grew 4.6% to $562.7 million and topped the consensus estimate of $560.7 million. For first-quarter fiscal 2019, F5 Networks expects revenues in the range of $542-$552 million. The Zacks Consensus Estimate stands at $546.65 million. The company expects non-GAAP earnings per share in the range of $2.51-$2.54. The consensus estimate is pegged at $2.54. Lets see how things are shaping up for the upcoming announcement. F5 Networks, Inc. Price and EPS Surprise F5 Networks, Inc. Price and EPS Surprise | F5 Networks, Inc. Quote Factors at Play F5 Networks growth in services and software solutions segment is a key driver. The companys traction in public cloud deployments, given the surge in demand for security in the multi-cloud environment, is a tailwind. Additionally, the company is also upping its public cloud expertise. The joining of former General Manager of Global Business Development and sale operations for Amazon's AMZN AWS Marketplace, Barry Russell, as the head of its cloud sales team, in fourth-quarter fiscal 2018 is expected to boost F5 Networks expansion into multi-cloud opportunities globally. The BIG-IP Cloud Edition had started gaining traction among customers immediately after its launch last year. This trend is expected to continue in the fiscal first quarter and drive revenues. On the last earnings call, the company hinted that a key managed care provider has chosen F5 Networks solutions, including the BIG-IP Cloud Edition, to aid its transition to the public cloud. This is expected to give impetus to the momentum further. Moreover, the company stated that it is witnessing strong momentum in Enterprise License Agreements and Virtual Edition subscription software deals. The size of deals is increasing, allowing F5 Networks to expand its use cases and implement a new consumption model, which is expected to drive software growth. The software segment grew 19% year over year in the last quarter of fiscal 2018, and contributed 17% to product revenues. The Zacks Consensus Estimate for product revenues in the fiscal first quarter is pegged at $237 million, indicating year-over-year growth of 4.4%. Further, the companys growth opportunities in the security market are driven by its advanced Web Application Firewall (WAF). It is witnessing an expansion in its addressable market and revenue growth prospects on the back of its WAF offerings. The strong adoption of advanced WAF in existing as well as new customers is expected to continue in the to-be-reported quarter. The company, however, expects quarterly fluctuations in hardware sales despite demand for new hardware in emerging markets like China and Latin America. A volatile spending environment and increasing competition remain headwinds for F5 Networks revenue growth. Soft spending by tier 1 service providers in North America is a concern. Additionally, increasing competition remain headwinds for F5 Networks revenue growth. Notably, Cisco Systems CSCO poses the most significant competitive threat to F5 Networks, given the dominance of the former in the overall networking market. What Our Model Says According to the Zacks model, a company with a Zacks Rank #1 (Strong Buy), 2 (Buy) or 3 (Hold) has a good chance of beating estimates if it also has a positive Earnings ESP. Zacks Rank #4 (Sell) or #5 (Strong Sell) stocks are best avoided. You can uncover the best stocks to buy or sell before theyre reported with our Earnings ESP Filter. F5 Networks has an Earnings ESP of 0.00% and carries a Zacks Rank #3. Some Stocks With Favorable Combination Here are few stocks, which per our model have the right combination of elements to post an earnings beat this quarter: Twitter, Inc. TWTR has an Earnings ESP of +26.55% and a Zacks Rank #1. You can see the complete list of todays Zacks #1 Rank stocks here. Our annual Top 10s have beaten the market with amazing regularity. In 2018, while the market dropped -5.2%, the portfolio scored well into double-digits overall with individual stocks rising as high as +61.5%. And from 2012-2017, while the market boomed +126.3, Zacks' Top 10s reached an even more sensational +181.9%. Today, you can download 7 Best Stocks for the Next 30 Days. Click to get this free report F5 Networks, Inc. (FFIV) : Free Stock Analysis Report To read this article on Zacks.com click here. Zacks Investment Research | F5 Networks Inc. (FFIV) is set to report first-quarter fiscal 2019 results on Jan 23. The company surpassed the Zacks Consensus Estimate in each of the trailing four quarters, the average positive earnings surprise being 6.45%. F5 networks' growth in services and software solutions segment is a key driver. | ctrlsum | 2 | https://news.yahoo.com/software-services-boost-f5-networks-093809268.html | 0.198239 |
Why are continental breakfasts called 'continental' breakfasts? | The best part about staying in a hotel isnt the crisp, white sheets or comfy beds its the free breakfast. Theres no better place to start your day than an all-you-can-eat buffet, after all. But at first glance, theres nothing very continental about a continental breakfast. No, American-style waffles and bagels dont have anything to do with it. These nationwide breakfasts were actually modeled after the light morning meals common throughout the European continent. Hence, the word continental. As hoteliers popped up across the country, they began to offer a lighter alternative to American breakfasts, serving fare like coffee, bread, pastries, and fruit. It was a win-win situation all around: Not only did the buffet please the palates of European tourists, but it was also cheap and easy to provide for the hotels. This wasnt the kind of hearty meal that Americans were used to, though. In fact, when hotels first began serving light breakfasts in the late 19th and early 20th centuries, American diners were outraged. Harpers Weekly even demanded the idea be banished from the hemisphere where the Monroe Doctrine and the pie should reign supreme. Luckily, people arent as passionate about their hotel buffets anymoreor they just go to IHOP. More importantly, breakfast isnt the only free perk you can get from your hotel. Find out 21 secrets your hotel doesnt want you to know. This article originally appeared on Reader's Digest. | There's nothing very continental about a continental breakfast. These nationwide breakfasts were modeled after the light morning meals common throughout the European continent, hence the word continental. | ctrlsum | 1 | https://www.foxnews.com/food-drink/why-are-continental-breakfasts-called-continental-breakfasts | 0.306515 |
Will Boeing Continue to Surge Higher? | As of late, it has definitely been a great time to be an investor in The Boeing Company. As of late, it has definitely been a great time to be an investor in The Boeing Company BA. The stock has moved higher by 0.1% in the past month, while it is also above its 20 Day SMA too. This combination of strong price performance and favorable technical, could suggest that the stock may be on the right path. We certainly think that this might be the case, particularly if you consider BAs recent earnings estimate revision activity. From this look, the companys future is quite favorable; as BA has earned itself a Zacks Rank #1 (Strong Buy), meaning that its recent run may continue for a bit longer, and that this isnt the top for the in-focus company. You can see the complete list of todays Zacks #1 Rank stocks here. Our annual Top 10s have beaten the market with amazing regularity. In 2018, while the market dropped -5.2%, the portfolio scored well into double-digits overall with individual stocks rising as high as +61.5%. And from 2012-2017, while the market boomed +126.3, Zacks' Top 10s reached an even more sensational +181.9%. Today, you can download 7 Best Stocks for the Next 30 Days. Click to get this free report To read this article on Zacks.com click here. Zacks Investment Research | The Boeing Company (BA) is seeing strong price performance. The stock has moved higher by 0.1% in the past month. | pegasus | 0 | https://news.yahoo.com/boeing-continue-surge-higher-111411962.html | 0.151766 |
Will Boeing Continue to Surge Higher? | As of late, it has definitely been a great time to be an investor in The Boeing Company. As of late, it has definitely been a great time to be an investor in The Boeing Company BA. The stock has moved higher by 0.1% in the past month, while it is also above its 20 Day SMA too. This combination of strong price performance and favorable technical, could suggest that the stock may be on the right path. We certainly think that this might be the case, particularly if you consider BAs recent earnings estimate revision activity. From this look, the companys future is quite favorable; as BA has earned itself a Zacks Rank #1 (Strong Buy), meaning that its recent run may continue for a bit longer, and that this isnt the top for the in-focus company. You can see the complete list of todays Zacks #1 Rank stocks here. Our annual Top 10s have beaten the market with amazing regularity. In 2018, while the market dropped -5.2%, the portfolio scored well into double-digits overall with individual stocks rising as high as +61.5%. And from 2012-2017, while the market boomed +126.3, Zacks' Top 10s reached an even more sensational +181.9%. Today, you can download 7 Best Stocks for the Next 30 Days. Click to get this free report To read this article on Zacks.com click here. Zacks Investment Research | The Boeing Company (BA) is seeing strong price performance. The stock has moved higher by 0.1% in the past month. This combination of strong price performance and favorable technical, could suggest that the stock may be on the right path. | pegasus | 1 | https://news.yahoo.com/boeing-continue-surge-higher-111411962.html | 0.191737 |
Will Boeing Continue to Surge Higher? | As of late, it has definitely been a great time to be an investor in The Boeing Company. As of late, it has definitely been a great time to be an investor in The Boeing Company BA. The stock has moved higher by 0.1% in the past month, while it is also above its 20 Day SMA too. This combination of strong price performance and favorable technical, could suggest that the stock may be on the right path. We certainly think that this might be the case, particularly if you consider BAs recent earnings estimate revision activity. From this look, the companys future is quite favorable; as BA has earned itself a Zacks Rank #1 (Strong Buy), meaning that its recent run may continue for a bit longer, and that this isnt the top for the in-focus company. You can see the complete list of todays Zacks #1 Rank stocks here. Our annual Top 10s have beaten the market with amazing regularity. In 2018, while the market dropped -5.2%, the portfolio scored well into double-digits overall with individual stocks rising as high as +61.5%. And from 2012-2017, while the market boomed +126.3, Zacks' Top 10s reached an even more sensational +181.9%. Today, you can download 7 Best Stocks for the Next 30 Days. Click to get this free report To read this article on Zacks.com click here. Zacks Investment Research | The Boeing Company (BA) is seeing strong price performance. The stock has moved higher by 0.1% in the past month. This combination of strong price performance and favorable technical, could suggest that the stock may be on the right path. You can see the complete list of todays Zacks #1 Rank stocks here. | pegasus | 2 | https://news.yahoo.com/boeing-continue-surge-higher-111411962.html | 0.205717 |
How can Californias Kamala Harris stand out in crowded 2020 race? | Breaking through will require any Democrat to possess a mix of policy chops, smart digital strategy, a deep fundraising network, a robust team in the field, and charisma that radiates from Iowa to South Carolina to Nevada. In short, someone who can convince the partys highly motivated rank and file that she or he can defeat President Trump. A lot of this, said Michael Ceraso, who was Sen. Bernie Sanders California presidential campaign director in 2016, is going to boil down to personality. Thats because most of the major Democrats who are expected to run generally agree on a progressive platform. It includes supporting government-insured universal health care coverage commonly referred to as Medicare for all raising the federal minimum wage and backing some version of tuition-free public college. Supporting Medicare for all is the price of admission in the primary, said Markos Moulitsas, founder of the DailyKos blog that is influential in progressive circles. Harris was the first senator to announce her co-sponsorship for Sanders Medicare-for-all legislation in 2017. It is a sign of how much the Democratic Party has shifted since the 2016 primary battle between Sanders and Hillary Clinton. In that campaign, the Vermont independent senator captured much of the progressive left with positions on health care and tuition that moderate Democrats thought were too far out of the mainstream. Sanders routinely won 60 percent of the vote in DailyKos reader straw polls, Moulitsas said. Now, Sanders has plenty of company on the left. This month, in DailyKos first straw poll of the 2020 campaign, the sites readers put Massachusetts Sen. Elizabeth Warren at the top of all candidates, with 22 percent. Harris and former Vice President Joe Biden were tied for third at 14 percent, right behind former Texas Rep. Beto ORourke. Sanders lagged in fifth. Sanders is kind of yesterdays news, Moulitsas said. He stood out when it was a binary choice between a flawed establishment candidate (Clinton) and him. But now people are looking for someone different and fresh. Yet Harris is so fresh that many voters dont know who she is. A Qunnipiac University poll in December found that 57 percent of respondents didnt know enough about the California senator to form an opinion. It could be worse: Sixty-eight percent felt the same way about Harris fellow senator Kirsten Gillibrand of New York, who announced last week that she was running. Moulitsas said Sanders and Warren start out as the lefts favorites but that Harris candidacy could catch fire, because as the daughter of an Indian-born mother and Jamaican father, shell be one of the few women of color in the race. So far, her only competition on that front is from Hawaii Rep. Tulsi Gabbard, who was born in American Samoa and announced her candidacy this month. I think demographics are going to be pretty important, Moulitsas said. This is the era of MeToo and Black Lives Matter, so any candidate who can reflect that energy, who can reflect the base of the party, will have a huge advantage. Being a woman of color gives (Harris) a perspective and an ability to address issues in a way that sets her apart from some of the other candidates, said Aimee Allison, an Oakland activist whose organization supporting women of color in politics, She the People, will host a presidential candidates forum in April in Texas. The goal of any Democratic candidate will be knitting together a 2020 version of the coalition of women, young people and people of color that vaulted Barack Obama into the White House more than a decade ago. The two people who are best positioned and equipped to reassemble that coalition are Kamala Harris and (New Jersey Democratic Sen.) Cory Booker, said Steve Phillips, a San Francisco fundraiser and commentator who focuses on increasing the political influence of communities of color. Phillips, author of the best-selling Brown Is the New White: How the Demographic Revolution Has Created A New American Majority, created a super PAC in December to support Booker and other candidates called Dream United. Groups affiliated with Phillips helped raised $11 million for Obamas 2008 campaign. Harris was an early endorser of that Obama campaign, and Phillips said she has already shown promise in making cultural connections with the Obama coalition. Those connections dont have to involve weighty policy issues. On a recent appearance on The Late Show with Stephen Colbert, Harris offered up a recorded mood mix of her favorite music, including a presidential song, Funkadelics One Nation Under a Groove. Harris gave a few dance moves as she sang a snippet, something it would be hard to imagine Joe Biden attempting. Phillips compared it to an episode in the 2008 campaign, a day after Obama gave a poorly received debate performance against Clinton. In a speech, Obama referenced the Jay-Z song Dirt Off Your Shoulder, miming the singer by giving his shoulder a dismissive dusting a way of saying, No big deal. The outburst of social media approval showed that Obama was winning cred among communities that Democrats have to motivate to win elections. That level of cultural connection is going to be significant among people of color in general and black women in particular, Phillips said. But Harris will have her challenges, too. Since she has served only two years in the Senate all in the minority her list of legislative accomplishments is short. While she often describes herself as a career prosecutor, some of her positions will be controversial in a Democratic primary. For example, she stayed neutral on Proposition 47, a 2014 voter-approved measure that reformed Californias three-strikes law by reducing some nonviolent crimes to misdemeanors. She didnt support legalizing cannabis for recreational use until last year, two years after California voters did. She will also be on unfamiliar ground campaigning outside her deep-blue native state. When she describes herself as a prosecutor from San Francisco, the only words some people will hear will be the last three. When you come from California, you feel protected and safe because nobody tells you youre wrong, said Michael Trujillo, a Democratic strategist who is the California adviser for a group supporting an ORourke candidacy. Its going to be interesting to see how she handles that grind, day in and day out, in Iowa and New Hampshire, where some people are going to love her and some will hate her. That will be a real test for her. The ideal Democrat, said several national political strategists, will be someone who can fight toe-to-toe with Trump, yet be inspirational enough to heal the nations divisions. A September poll found that 91 percent of Democratic likely voters in Iowa a nearly all-white state whose caucus is the first in the campaign said it was important that a 2020 candidate heal the racial, ethnic and partisan divide in our country. Voters are going to have two questions for the candidates, said Bill Burton, a top adviser to Obama who is not affiliated with a 2020 campaign. And second, can you get things done? Joe Garofoli is The San Francisco Chronicles senior political writer. Email: jgarofoli@sfchronicle.com Twitter: @joegarofoli | Kamala Harris is one of the few women of color in the 2020 presidential race. | ctrlsum | 0 | https://www.sfchronicle.com/politics/article/How-can-California-s-Kamala-Harris-stand-out-in-13549183.php | 0.292696 |
How can Californias Kamala Harris stand out in crowded 2020 race? | Breaking through will require any Democrat to possess a mix of policy chops, smart digital strategy, a deep fundraising network, a robust team in the field, and charisma that radiates from Iowa to South Carolina to Nevada. In short, someone who can convince the partys highly motivated rank and file that she or he can defeat President Trump. A lot of this, said Michael Ceraso, who was Sen. Bernie Sanders California presidential campaign director in 2016, is going to boil down to personality. Thats because most of the major Democrats who are expected to run generally agree on a progressive platform. It includes supporting government-insured universal health care coverage commonly referred to as Medicare for all raising the federal minimum wage and backing some version of tuition-free public college. Supporting Medicare for all is the price of admission in the primary, said Markos Moulitsas, founder of the DailyKos blog that is influential in progressive circles. Harris was the first senator to announce her co-sponsorship for Sanders Medicare-for-all legislation in 2017. It is a sign of how much the Democratic Party has shifted since the 2016 primary battle between Sanders and Hillary Clinton. In that campaign, the Vermont independent senator captured much of the progressive left with positions on health care and tuition that moderate Democrats thought were too far out of the mainstream. Sanders routinely won 60 percent of the vote in DailyKos reader straw polls, Moulitsas said. Now, Sanders has plenty of company on the left. This month, in DailyKos first straw poll of the 2020 campaign, the sites readers put Massachusetts Sen. Elizabeth Warren at the top of all candidates, with 22 percent. Harris and former Vice President Joe Biden were tied for third at 14 percent, right behind former Texas Rep. Beto ORourke. Sanders lagged in fifth. Sanders is kind of yesterdays news, Moulitsas said. He stood out when it was a binary choice between a flawed establishment candidate (Clinton) and him. But now people are looking for someone different and fresh. Yet Harris is so fresh that many voters dont know who she is. A Qunnipiac University poll in December found that 57 percent of respondents didnt know enough about the California senator to form an opinion. It could be worse: Sixty-eight percent felt the same way about Harris fellow senator Kirsten Gillibrand of New York, who announced last week that she was running. Moulitsas said Sanders and Warren start out as the lefts favorites but that Harris candidacy could catch fire, because as the daughter of an Indian-born mother and Jamaican father, shell be one of the few women of color in the race. So far, her only competition on that front is from Hawaii Rep. Tulsi Gabbard, who was born in American Samoa and announced her candidacy this month. I think demographics are going to be pretty important, Moulitsas said. This is the era of MeToo and Black Lives Matter, so any candidate who can reflect that energy, who can reflect the base of the party, will have a huge advantage. Being a woman of color gives (Harris) a perspective and an ability to address issues in a way that sets her apart from some of the other candidates, said Aimee Allison, an Oakland activist whose organization supporting women of color in politics, She the People, will host a presidential candidates forum in April in Texas. The goal of any Democratic candidate will be knitting together a 2020 version of the coalition of women, young people and people of color that vaulted Barack Obama into the White House more than a decade ago. The two people who are best positioned and equipped to reassemble that coalition are Kamala Harris and (New Jersey Democratic Sen.) Cory Booker, said Steve Phillips, a San Francisco fundraiser and commentator who focuses on increasing the political influence of communities of color. Phillips, author of the best-selling Brown Is the New White: How the Demographic Revolution Has Created A New American Majority, created a super PAC in December to support Booker and other candidates called Dream United. Groups affiliated with Phillips helped raised $11 million for Obamas 2008 campaign. Harris was an early endorser of that Obama campaign, and Phillips said she has already shown promise in making cultural connections with the Obama coalition. Those connections dont have to involve weighty policy issues. On a recent appearance on The Late Show with Stephen Colbert, Harris offered up a recorded mood mix of her favorite music, including a presidential song, Funkadelics One Nation Under a Groove. Harris gave a few dance moves as she sang a snippet, something it would be hard to imagine Joe Biden attempting. Phillips compared it to an episode in the 2008 campaign, a day after Obama gave a poorly received debate performance against Clinton. In a speech, Obama referenced the Jay-Z song Dirt Off Your Shoulder, miming the singer by giving his shoulder a dismissive dusting a way of saying, No big deal. The outburst of social media approval showed that Obama was winning cred among communities that Democrats have to motivate to win elections. That level of cultural connection is going to be significant among people of color in general and black women in particular, Phillips said. But Harris will have her challenges, too. Since she has served only two years in the Senate all in the minority her list of legislative accomplishments is short. While she often describes herself as a career prosecutor, some of her positions will be controversial in a Democratic primary. For example, she stayed neutral on Proposition 47, a 2014 voter-approved measure that reformed Californias three-strikes law by reducing some nonviolent crimes to misdemeanors. She didnt support legalizing cannabis for recreational use until last year, two years after California voters did. She will also be on unfamiliar ground campaigning outside her deep-blue native state. When she describes herself as a prosecutor from San Francisco, the only words some people will hear will be the last three. When you come from California, you feel protected and safe because nobody tells you youre wrong, said Michael Trujillo, a Democratic strategist who is the California adviser for a group supporting an ORourke candidacy. Its going to be interesting to see how she handles that grind, day in and day out, in Iowa and New Hampshire, where some people are going to love her and some will hate her. That will be a real test for her. The ideal Democrat, said several national political strategists, will be someone who can fight toe-to-toe with Trump, yet be inspirational enough to heal the nations divisions. A September poll found that 91 percent of Democratic likely voters in Iowa a nearly all-white state whose caucus is the first in the campaign said it was important that a 2020 candidate heal the racial, ethnic and partisan divide in our country. Voters are going to have two questions for the candidates, said Bill Burton, a top adviser to Obama who is not affiliated with a 2020 campaign. And second, can you get things done? Joe Garofoli is The San Francisco Chronicles senior political writer. Email: jgarofoli@sfchronicle.com Twitter: @joegarofoli | Kamala Harris is one of the few women of color in the 2020 Democratic presidential race. She is also a strong supporter of Medicare for all and a strong advocate for the minimum wage. | ctrlsum | 1 | https://www.sfchronicle.com/politics/article/How-can-California-s-Kamala-Harris-stand-out-in-13549183.php | 0.448443 |
Should the entire Mueller report be released to the public? | The nation is waiting with bated breath for the results of Robert Mueller's investigation into Donald Trump's 2016 campaign and potential ties with Russia. But many are beginning to worry they may never see the fruit of Mueller's labor. During his Congressional hearings, Donald Trump's nominee for attorney general, William Barr, refused to offer lawmakers assurances that he would release the report in its entirety. Many believe the public deserves the full, unedited truth. PERSPECTIVES Barr, who previously served as attorney general under George H.W. Bush, holds an extremely expansive view of presidential powers. Barr's ideological beliefs include the theory that a sitting president cannot be indicted for a crime. During his confirmation hearing, Barr would not guarantee he would release Mueller's investigation in its entirety. Barr specifically noted if Mueller declined to prosecute anyone he investigated, Barr would not release that information. The New York Times talked to Neil Kinkopf, a law professor at Georgia State University and a former Justice Department official, about how Barr's beliefs in presidential powers could affect the release of Mueller's report. On Wednesday, Mr. Kinkopf noted that the Justice Department had taken the position that sitting presidents could not be indicted while in office. Maybe Many Americans still remember independent counsel Kenneth Starr's extensive, explicit report on Bill Clinton's affair with Monica Lewinsky. Starr released his full report not only to Congress but to the public as well. Starr's report has become infamous for how revealing and salacious it was in its details. The Washington Post reports since the Starr report's release, Congress has rewritten the rules governing Justice Department investigations. Starr was required to "not only to conduct a criminal investigation but also to submit a report to Congress if he found any evidence of impeachable offenses." That statute lapsed in 1999 and the rules under which Mueller are working are far stricter. Section 600.8(c) of the regulations provides that the special counsel shall provide the attorney general with a "confidential report explaining the prosecution or declination decisions reached by the Special Counsel." If the special counsel finds that "other governmental action outside the criminal justice system might be appropriate," (presumably, such as impeachment) he is empowered only to "consult with the Attorney General with respect to the appropriate component to take any necessary action." Under these new regulations, it is up to the attorney general to determine how much, if any, of the special counsel's report to release. Opinion | A Mueller report may never see the light of day Politico reports many lawmakers on both sides of the political spectrum believe the report needs to be released in full in order to provide the American people with transparency. "The American people deserve to know what the Department of Justice has concluded. And they're smart enough to figure it out," Sen. John Kennedy, a Louisiana Republican, told Barr during his confirmation hearing. "The American people don't read Aristotle every day, but they can figure it out." "I would strongly encourage you to put this all to rest, to make a report, a final report public," he added. "Let everybody draw their own conclusions so we can move on. If somebody did something wrong, they should be punished. But if they didn't, let's stop the innuendo and the rumors and the leaking and let's move on." Without the full report, some amount of distrust will continue to exist for all Americans, regardless of political affiliation. GOP wants Mueller transparency -- with caveats There are concerns of a dramatic loophole that could work in President Trump's favor. If, as Barr believes, a sitting president cannot be indicted, and the only portions of the report that can be released are those related to indictments, then the president would be able to get away with past criminal activity--whether or not it has been discovered by Mueller's team. Per The Washington Post: "If the only reason that Mueller's grand Jury can't file an indictment is the DOJ policy that says no indicting of sitting presidents, then Trump gets the best of both worlds: no indictment and no revealing of the evidence the grand jury saw -- even though it may be more than enough to indict any other citizen of the republic," former federal prosecutor Patrick Cotter said. Analysis | R.I.P. The Tylt is focused on debates and conversations around news, current events and pop culture. We provide our community with the opportunity to share their opinions and vote on topics that matter most to them. We actively engage the community and present meaningful data on the debates and conversations as they progress. The Tylt is a place where your opinion counts, literally. The Tylt is an Advance Local Media, LLC property. Join us on Twitter @TheTylt, on Instagram @TheTylt or on Facebook, we'd love to hear what you have to say. | William Barr would not guarantee he would release Mueller's investigation in its entirety. Many believe the public deserves the full, unedited truth from the special counsel's report. Barr believes a sitting president cannot be indicted for a crime, and only portions of the report that can be released are those related to indictments. | ctrlsum | 2 | https://www.cleveland.com/nation/index.ssf/2019/01/should_the_entire_mueller_repo.html | 0.119212 |
What's in Store for Bristol-Myers (BMY) in Q4 Earnings? | Bristol-Myers Squibb Company BMY is expected to report fourth-quarter 2018 results on Jan 24, before market opens. Bristol-Myers shares have decreased 8.9% in the past six months, against the industrys growth of 7.1%. Bristol-Myers has an excellent track record. The company delivered positive earnings surprise in all the four quarters. Average positive earnings surprise in the last four quarters is 12%. In the last reported quarter, Bristol-Myers delivered a positive surprise of 19.8%. Lets see how things are shaping up for this quarter. Bristol-Myers key immuno-oncology drug, Opdivo is expected to be the primary revenue driver in the fourth quarter, with several line extensions in the past year. Earlier in 2018, Opdivo was approved as a monotherapy for the treatment of metastatic small cell lung cancer (SCLC) in third-line setting in patients who have received platinum-based chemotherapy and at least one other line of therapy. The drug also received approval for treating microsatellite instability high or mismatch repair deficient metastatic colorectal cancer, in combination with Yervoy in second-line setting in the United States. The European Commission recently approved the combination of Opdivo plus Yervoy for the first-line treatment of patients with intermediate- and poor-risk advanced renal cell carcinoma (RCC). Opdivo has already captured 30% share of new patients in the first-line RCC market. The drug, which is approved for multiple indications, has generated sales of $1.8 billion in the third quarter and $4.9 billion in the first nine months of 2018, increasing 42% and 37%, respectively, from the year-ago period. Yervoys line extension in pediatric patients aged 12 years or older with unresectable or metastatic melanoma was approved in Europe. The FDA approved the drug in combination with Opdivo for first-line treatment of RCC. Label expansion of the drug should further boost sales. Oncology drug, Sprycel is also maintaining momentum. The European Commission approved a line extension of Sprycel in pediatric patients with Ph+ chronic myeloid leukemia. The FDA also approved the drug for the treatment of pediatric patients aged one year or older, with newly diagnosed Philadelphia chromosome-positive (Ph+) acute lymphoblastic leukemia (ALL), in combination with chemotherapy. We expect the recent label expansion of the drug to boost sales. Cardiovascular drug, Eliquis also showed strong performance in the first nine months of 2018, with sales growing 35% from the year-ago quarter. In fact, robust sales are expected in the fourth quarter too, driven by expansion in market share. However, the Hepatitis C and HIV businesses continue to face competitive pressure. Sales for the franchise are expected to decline. Investors will also focus on further updates on the companys recent announcement of acquiring Celgene Corporation CELG for $74 billion. The impending acquisition will result in a specialty biopharma company with a strong oncology portfolio and diverse pipeline in the therapeutic areas of inflammatory, immunologic and cardiovascular diseases. Bristol-Myers was pursuing an acquisition for quite some time now to bolster its portfolio. While its blockbuster immuno-oncology drug, Opdivo continues to perform well on the back of label expansions, pricing concerns and stiff competition in the immuno-oncology space have limited market share gains. | Bristol-Myers Squibb Company BMY is expected to report fourth-quarter 2018 results on Jan 24, before market opens. The company delivered positive earnings surprise in all the four quarters. Key immuno-oncology drug, Opdivo expected to be the primary revenue driver in the fourth quarter. | bart | 2 | https://news.yahoo.com/whats-store-bristol-myers-bmy-125012911.html | 0.230345 |
Will Core MedSurg Segment Aid Stryker's (SYK) Q4 Earnings? | Stryker Corporations SYK fourth-quarter 2018 results, scheduled for release on Jan 29, after market close, are likely to gain from a strong show by the core MedSurg segment. A strong 2018 view also buoys optimism. Q3 Results at a Glance In the last reported quarter, Stryker delivered adjusted earnings per share of $1.69, which beat the Zacks Consensus Estimate by a penny. Earnings improved 11.2% year over year and were within the companys guidance. The company reported revenues of $3.24 billion, missing the Zacks Consensus Estimate of $3.26 billion by a narrow margin. Revenues increased 7.9% on a year-over-year basis. Stryker has a positive average surprise of 2% for the trailing four quarters. The Zacks Consensus Estimate for fourth-quarter earnings per share is pegged at $2.15, reflecting year-over-year growth of 9.7%. The same for revenues is pinned at $3.73 billion, showing growth of 7.6% over the prior-year quarter. Stryker Corporation Price and EPS Surprise Stryker Corporation Price and EPS Surprise | Stryker Corporation Quote Lets see how things are shaping up before the earnings results. MedSurg in Focus This segment consists of surgical instruments, endoscopic and emergency medical equipment and has been consistently driving Strykers top line. In the last reported quarter, the unit contributed a significant 44.4% to Strykers net sales. Revenues in the segment came in at $1.44 billion, up 10.4% at constant currency (cc). It is encouraging to note that, for the quarter to be reported, the Zacks Consensus Estimate for the segments revenues stands at $1.69 billion, up 7.2% year over year. MedSurg has three subsegments Endoscopy, Instruments and Medical. The Zacks Consensus Estimate for Endoscopy revenues is pegged at $505 million, up 7.7% year over year. The same for Instruments revenues stands at $533 million, showing a year-over-year rise of 9.2%. Moreover, for MedSurg Medical revenues, the consensus estimate is pinned at $590 million, up 6.1% on a year-over-year basis. Other Factors at Play Strong Guidance For the fourth quarter of 2018, earnings are projected within $2.13 to $2.18. In fact, for 2018, Stryker projects earnings in the range of $7.25-$7.30, higher than the previous guidance of $7.22-$7.27. The Zacks Consensus Estimate for earnings is pegged at $7.28, within the guided range. Orthopaedic Implant, Neurotechnology & Spine to Drive Growth In the last reported quarter, Strykers core Orthopaedic segment contributed 36.1% to net sales. For the quarter to be reported, the Zacks Consensus Estimate for the segments sales is pegged at $1.36 billion, showing a year-over-year rise of 3.8%. Meanwhile, Neurotechnology & Spine accounted for 19.4% of Strykers revenues in the last reported quarter. For the quarter to be reported, the Zacks Consensus Estimate for the segments sales stands at $677 million, showing year-over-year growth of 15.5%. Acquisition Risks Stryker has lately been on an acquisition spree. Last November, the company completed a previously-announced acquisition of K2M Group Holdings and in October, it acquired Invuity. While this improves revenue opportunities, it adds to integration risks and also exerts pressure on gross and operating margins. | Stryker Corporation's SYK fourth-quarter 2018 results, scheduled for release on Jan 29, are likely to gain from a strong show by the core MedSurg segment. | pegasus | 1 | https://news.yahoo.com/core-medsurg-segment-aid-strykers-125612073.html | 0.403057 |
Will Core MedSurg Segment Aid Stryker's (SYK) Q4 Earnings? | Stryker Corporations SYK fourth-quarter 2018 results, scheduled for release on Jan 29, after market close, are likely to gain from a strong show by the core MedSurg segment. A strong 2018 view also buoys optimism. Q3 Results at a Glance In the last reported quarter, Stryker delivered adjusted earnings per share of $1.69, which beat the Zacks Consensus Estimate by a penny. Earnings improved 11.2% year over year and were within the companys guidance. The company reported revenues of $3.24 billion, missing the Zacks Consensus Estimate of $3.26 billion by a narrow margin. Revenues increased 7.9% on a year-over-year basis. Stryker has a positive average surprise of 2% for the trailing four quarters. The Zacks Consensus Estimate for fourth-quarter earnings per share is pegged at $2.15, reflecting year-over-year growth of 9.7%. The same for revenues is pinned at $3.73 billion, showing growth of 7.6% over the prior-year quarter. Stryker Corporation Price and EPS Surprise Stryker Corporation Price and EPS Surprise | Stryker Corporation Quote Lets see how things are shaping up before the earnings results. MedSurg in Focus This segment consists of surgical instruments, endoscopic and emergency medical equipment and has been consistently driving Strykers top line. In the last reported quarter, the unit contributed a significant 44.4% to Strykers net sales. Revenues in the segment came in at $1.44 billion, up 10.4% at constant currency (cc). It is encouraging to note that, for the quarter to be reported, the Zacks Consensus Estimate for the segments revenues stands at $1.69 billion, up 7.2% year over year. MedSurg has three subsegments Endoscopy, Instruments and Medical. The Zacks Consensus Estimate for Endoscopy revenues is pegged at $505 million, up 7.7% year over year. The same for Instruments revenues stands at $533 million, showing a year-over-year rise of 9.2%. Moreover, for MedSurg Medical revenues, the consensus estimate is pinned at $590 million, up 6.1% on a year-over-year basis. Other Factors at Play Strong Guidance For the fourth quarter of 2018, earnings are projected within $2.13 to $2.18. In fact, for 2018, Stryker projects earnings in the range of $7.25-$7.30, higher than the previous guidance of $7.22-$7.27. The Zacks Consensus Estimate for earnings is pegged at $7.28, within the guided range. Orthopaedic Implant, Neurotechnology & Spine to Drive Growth In the last reported quarter, Strykers core Orthopaedic segment contributed 36.1% to net sales. For the quarter to be reported, the Zacks Consensus Estimate for the segments sales is pegged at $1.36 billion, showing a year-over-year rise of 3.8%. Meanwhile, Neurotechnology & Spine accounted for 19.4% of Strykers revenues in the last reported quarter. For the quarter to be reported, the Zacks Consensus Estimate for the segments sales stands at $677 million, showing year-over-year growth of 15.5%. Acquisition Risks Stryker has lately been on an acquisition spree. Last November, the company completed a previously-announced acquisition of K2M Group Holdings and in October, it acquired Invuity. While this improves revenue opportunities, it adds to integration risks and also exerts pressure on gross and operating margins. | Stryker Corporations SYK fourth-quarter 2018 results, scheduled for release on Jan 29, after market close, are likely to gain from a strong show by the core MedSurg segment. A strong 2018 view also buoys optimism. | bart | 2 | https://news.yahoo.com/core-medsurg-segment-aid-strykers-125612073.html | 0.472506 |
Who is running for president in 2020 so far? | Even though 2019 just began, a number of candidates have already declared their intentions to seek the White House in 2020. MORE: The 2020 presidential candidates ranked by betting odds Candidates such as Julian Castro and John Delaney have already made formal announcements and launched their campaign websites, while other candidates such as Elizabeth Warren and Kirsten Gillibrand have announced the formation of presidential exploratory committees. Click through the slideshow above to see which candidates have officially declared they are running for president so far. This article will continue to update as other candidates officially declare their White House bids. Feel free to bookmark it. | A number of candidates have already declared their intentions to seek the White House in 2020. Julian Castro, John Delaney and Kirsten Gillibrand are just a few of the candidates. | pegasus | 1 | https://www.sfgate.com/politics/article/2020-presidential-candidates-list-who-is-running-13540053.php | 0.34964 |
Who is running for president in 2020 so far? | Even though 2019 just began, a number of candidates have already declared their intentions to seek the White House in 2020. MORE: The 2020 presidential candidates ranked by betting odds Candidates such as Julian Castro and John Delaney have already made formal announcements and launched their campaign websites, while other candidates such as Elizabeth Warren and Kirsten Gillibrand have announced the formation of presidential exploratory committees. Click through the slideshow above to see which candidates have officially declared they are running for president so far. This article will continue to update as other candidates officially declare their White House bids. Feel free to bookmark it. | A number of candidates have already declared their intentions to seek the White House in 2020. Julian Castro, John Delaney and Kirsten Gillibrand are just a few of the candidates. Click through the slideshow to see which candidates have officially declared they are running. | pegasus | 2 | https://www.sfgate.com/politics/article/2020-presidential-candidates-list-who-is-running-13540053.php | 0.392889 |
Is Jared Goff dating swimsuit model Christen Harper? | It appears Sean McVay isnt the only member of the Rams with a personal cheerleader. Quarterback Jared Goff is said to be dating swimsuit stunner Christen Harper, according to SportsGossip.com. An insider tells the sports site Goff is hiding her from everyone except some friends. The brunette beauty also was photographed at a past Rams game. While Goff, 24, and Harper do follow one another on social media, their rumored relationship is not yet Instagram official. It remains to be seen if Harper will be in New Orleans on Sunday, when the Rams face the Saints in the NFC Championship game. Should he defeat Drew Brees, Goff would punch his ticket to his first ever Super Bowl. This article originally appeared in the New York Post. | Quarterback Jared Goff is said to be dating swimsuit stunner Christen Harper. | ctrlsum | 0 | https://www.foxnews.com/entertainment/is-jared-goff-dating-swimsuit-model-christen-harper | 0.199704 |
Is Jared Goff dating swimsuit model Christen Harper? | It appears Sean McVay isnt the only member of the Rams with a personal cheerleader. Quarterback Jared Goff is said to be dating swimsuit stunner Christen Harper, according to SportsGossip.com. An insider tells the sports site Goff is hiding her from everyone except some friends. The brunette beauty also was photographed at a past Rams game. While Goff, 24, and Harper do follow one another on social media, their rumored relationship is not yet Instagram official. It remains to be seen if Harper will be in New Orleans on Sunday, when the Rams face the Saints in the NFC Championship game. Should he defeat Drew Brees, Goff would punch his ticket to his first ever Super Bowl. This article originally appeared in the New York Post. | Jared Goff is said to be dating swimsuit stunner Christen Harper. The brunette beauty also was photographed at a past Rams game. It remains to be seen if Harper will be in New Orleans on Sunday. | bart | 1 | https://www.foxnews.com/entertainment/is-jared-goff-dating-swimsuit-model-christen-harper | 0.322345 |
Is Jared Goff dating swimsuit model Christen Harper? | It appears Sean McVay isnt the only member of the Rams with a personal cheerleader. Quarterback Jared Goff is said to be dating swimsuit stunner Christen Harper, according to SportsGossip.com. An insider tells the sports site Goff is hiding her from everyone except some friends. The brunette beauty also was photographed at a past Rams game. While Goff, 24, and Harper do follow one another on social media, their rumored relationship is not yet Instagram official. It remains to be seen if Harper will be in New Orleans on Sunday, when the Rams face the Saints in the NFC Championship game. Should he defeat Drew Brees, Goff would punch his ticket to his first ever Super Bowl. This article originally appeared in the New York Post. | Jared Goff is said to be dating swimsuit stunner Christen Harper. The brunette beauty also was photographed at a past Rams game. It remains to be seen if Harper will be in New Orleans on Sunday, when the Rams face the Saints in the NFC Championship game. | bart | 2 | https://www.foxnews.com/entertainment/is-jared-goff-dating-swimsuit-model-christen-harper | 0.33168 |
Is Sanity Breaking Out in Washington? A Bipartisan Fix to FAFSA Complexity? | Literally for decades, a major impediment for individuals wanting federal student financial assistance is the Free Application for Federal Student Assistance (FAFSA) form. I remember in about 2008 sitting in an interminably long meeting with Education Secretary Margaret Spellings and underlings trying to simplify a form over 100 questions long and hideously complex. My wife, a retired high school guidance counselor in a low income Appalachian setting, told me the FAFSA form scared off many low income students seeking financial assistance. Some academic research has said the same thing. More than a decade has passed and the problem of the FAFSA form still remains, no doubt reflecting federal bureaucratic inertia and infighting. On December 20, the U.S. Senate unanimously passed legislation, dubbed the FAFSA Act, helping achieve rationality in applying for federal assistance by permitting the Internal Revenue Service to share tax information on applicants for aid directly with the Department of Education. Notable in this era of hyper-partisanship: the bill was co-sponsored by two liberal Democrats, Patty Murray and Sheldon Whitehouse, and two conservative to moderate Republicans, Lamar Alexander (chair of the Senate Education Committee and a former president of the University of Tennessee) and Cory Gardner. In today's extremely acrimonious environment, when Senators as diverse as Ted Cruz and Elizabeth Warren can agree on something, it is notable. The legislation must pass the House, where hopefully its merits will overcome partisan bickering or maneuvering that might keep the bill off the House calendar. If I recall from the 2008 meeting, University of Michigan Professor Sue Dynarski and I argued that the FAFSA form provides very little important information not available on federal income tax forms. Income is the predominant determinant of financial need, although tax returns also provide other useful information, such as the number of children of college age in the family. The marginal gains from other information provided by the FAFSA, such as family assets, mortgage payments, etc., are outweighed by the barriers created by form complexity. Students should be able to apply for federal student aid by signing a simple postcard sized form that says "by signing this form, you understand that your income tax returns will be provided to the U.S. Department of Education for purposes of determining eligibility for federal student financial assistance; please provide your Social Security(Taxpayer Identification) number and sign the enclosed form." This should eventually open up the use of IRS data in other ways which could provide enormously useful consumer information without invading the privacy of individual taxpayers. In particular, data on the financial success of students by school attended and academic major would be great. Some information is already provided and published on the College Scorecard of the U.S. Department of Education, but it excludes large number of students who have not applied for student aid. That is true, and in a perfect world we would quickly phase out or drastically reduce federal financial aid in favor of better alternatives. Indeed, if I had my way, we would abolish the U.S. Department of Education. But we have a highly imperfect world, and the political process is certainly not producing optimal results these days. IF we are going to have a substantial federal presence in financing college education, than we should reduce barriers to student participation in the program. That is why I suspect that even the bitterly partisan and rancorous U.S. Congress might be able to get its act together and pass this legislation. | The Free Application for Federal Student Assistance (FAFSA) form has been a major impediment for students seeking financial assistance. The Senate passed the FAFSA Act, allowing the IRS to share tax information on applicants for aid directly with the Department of Education. The legislation must pass the House, where hopefully its merits will overcome partisan bickering. | bart | 2 | https://www.forbes.com/sites/richardvedder/2019/01/21/is-sanity-breaking-out-in-washington-a-bipartisan-fix-to-fafsa-complexity/ | 0.13588 |
How Does a Certificate of Deposit (CD) Work? | A certificate of deposit, or CD, can help you get more interest from your idle cash. Heres what you need to know about them. Image Credit: Getty Images A certificate of deposit, also known as a CD, is a type of bank account that involves placing a deposit with a financial institution for a certain amount of time. For this reason, a CD is often referred to as a time-deposit account. The ending date of a CD account is known as its maturity date, and the entire account balance is generally removed when this date is reached. CDs generally pay fixed interest rates that are determined upon opening the account, and while the interest rates paid by CDs generally depend on market conditions, they can vary significantly between financial institutions. CDs vs. Savings accounts While a CD is technically a type of savings account, it differs from a traditional bank savings account in a few important ways -- some include: The most obvious difference between a CD and a savings account is that youre committing to leaving your money in the CD for a certain amount of time. CD term lengths generally range from a few months to about five years, although shorter or longer terms may be available. With a savings account, you are free to withdraw your money whenever youd like. Because youre committing to leave your funds on deposit, banks typically pay higher interest rates on CDs than they do on savings accounts. And, the longer the term of the CD, the higher the interest rate it will typically pay. There is generally no such thing as a partial withdrawal from a CD. For example, if you deposit $1,000 into a savings account, you can choose to withdraw a portion of it and leave the rest in the account. With a CD, your withdrawal generally has to be for the entire amount, even if you decide to access your funds before the maturity date and accept a penalty. The interest rate paid by a CD depends on a few factors. For one, overall financial market conditions tend to influence CD yields. Specifically, if the Federal Reserve raises interest rates, CD yields will generally rise across the board. On the other hand, when the Federal Reserve lowers interest rates, CD yields tend to fall. Having said that, the type of financial institution offering the CD also plays a big role. Brick-and-mortar banks tend to have lower CD yields than credit unions, for example. And, online financial institutions tend to have the best CD yields of all. As an example, as of Nov. 5, 2018, the national average interest rate for a 12-month CD was 0.49%. Meanwhile, Marcus by Goldman Sachs offers an annual percentage yield, or APY, of 2.55% -- more than five times the average. Its very important to shop around for the best rates as the variation between institutions can be substantial. Additionally, its important to mention that CD interest compounds throughout the term. For example, lets say that you deposit $1,000 in a five-year CD that has an annual percentage yield of 3%. This means that at the end of the first year, your CD would be worth $1,030. Then during the second year, you would earn 3% on $1,030. Over time, this can really add a significant amount to your returns if you choose a CD with a longer maturity. Jumbo CDs If you have a lot of money to deposit, you may be able to obtain a so-called Jumbo CD. Many financial institutions are willing to pay higher interest rates for Jumbo CDs, but not all of them do, so if you have a large deposit, be sure to inquire about Jumbo CD rates. Jumbo CDs are generally defined as a minimum deposit amount of $100,000, but many institutions have lower thresholds that pay preferable interest rates. CDs as retirement investments Its also important to mention that you can hold CDs in certain retirement accounts, such as individual retirement accounts, or IRAs. If you put your money in a CD with a bank, the interest your account earns is generally considered taxable income. However, if your CD is held in an IRA or other tax-advantaged retirement account, you wont have to worry about paying tax on the interest you receive on an annual basis. If you invest in a CD through a tax-deferred retirement account like a traditional IRA, your account deposit may be tax deductible, and you wont have to worry about any income taxes on your interest income until you make a withdrawal from the account. Or, if you invest through an after-tax account like a Roth IRA, your contributions wont be deductible, but qualified withdrawals from the account (including your interest income) will be 100% tax-free. If were defining risk as the potential loss of your deposit, the answer is almost certainly no. Bank CDs are FDIC-insured up to $250,000 per depositor, per institution. And credit union CDs are also insured through the National Credit Union Administration with the same limits. | A certificate of deposit, or CD, can help you get more interest from your idle cash. | bart | 0 | https://news.yahoo.com/does-certificate-deposit-cd-143000911.html | 0.202493 |
How Does a Certificate of Deposit (CD) Work? | A certificate of deposit, or CD, can help you get more interest from your idle cash. Heres what you need to know about them. Image Credit: Getty Images A certificate of deposit, also known as a CD, is a type of bank account that involves placing a deposit with a financial institution for a certain amount of time. For this reason, a CD is often referred to as a time-deposit account. The ending date of a CD account is known as its maturity date, and the entire account balance is generally removed when this date is reached. CDs generally pay fixed interest rates that are determined upon opening the account, and while the interest rates paid by CDs generally depend on market conditions, they can vary significantly between financial institutions. CDs vs. Savings accounts While a CD is technically a type of savings account, it differs from a traditional bank savings account in a few important ways -- some include: The most obvious difference between a CD and a savings account is that youre committing to leaving your money in the CD for a certain amount of time. CD term lengths generally range from a few months to about five years, although shorter or longer terms may be available. With a savings account, you are free to withdraw your money whenever youd like. Because youre committing to leave your funds on deposit, banks typically pay higher interest rates on CDs than they do on savings accounts. And, the longer the term of the CD, the higher the interest rate it will typically pay. There is generally no such thing as a partial withdrawal from a CD. For example, if you deposit $1,000 into a savings account, you can choose to withdraw a portion of it and leave the rest in the account. With a CD, your withdrawal generally has to be for the entire amount, even if you decide to access your funds before the maturity date and accept a penalty. The interest rate paid by a CD depends on a few factors. For one, overall financial market conditions tend to influence CD yields. Specifically, if the Federal Reserve raises interest rates, CD yields will generally rise across the board. On the other hand, when the Federal Reserve lowers interest rates, CD yields tend to fall. Having said that, the type of financial institution offering the CD also plays a big role. Brick-and-mortar banks tend to have lower CD yields than credit unions, for example. And, online financial institutions tend to have the best CD yields of all. As an example, as of Nov. 5, 2018, the national average interest rate for a 12-month CD was 0.49%. Meanwhile, Marcus by Goldman Sachs offers an annual percentage yield, or APY, of 2.55% -- more than five times the average. Its very important to shop around for the best rates as the variation between institutions can be substantial. Additionally, its important to mention that CD interest compounds throughout the term. For example, lets say that you deposit $1,000 in a five-year CD that has an annual percentage yield of 3%. This means that at the end of the first year, your CD would be worth $1,030. Then during the second year, you would earn 3% on $1,030. Over time, this can really add a significant amount to your returns if you choose a CD with a longer maturity. Jumbo CDs If you have a lot of money to deposit, you may be able to obtain a so-called Jumbo CD. Many financial institutions are willing to pay higher interest rates for Jumbo CDs, but not all of them do, so if you have a large deposit, be sure to inquire about Jumbo CD rates. Jumbo CDs are generally defined as a minimum deposit amount of $100,000, but many institutions have lower thresholds that pay preferable interest rates. CDs as retirement investments Its also important to mention that you can hold CDs in certain retirement accounts, such as individual retirement accounts, or IRAs. If you put your money in a CD with a bank, the interest your account earns is generally considered taxable income. However, if your CD is held in an IRA or other tax-advantaged retirement account, you wont have to worry about paying tax on the interest you receive on an annual basis. If you invest in a CD through a tax-deferred retirement account like a traditional IRA, your account deposit may be tax deductible, and you wont have to worry about any income taxes on your interest income until you make a withdrawal from the account. Or, if you invest through an after-tax account like a Roth IRA, your contributions wont be deductible, but qualified withdrawals from the account (including your interest income) will be 100% tax-free. If were defining risk as the potential loss of your deposit, the answer is almost certainly no. Bank CDs are FDIC-insured up to $250,000 per depositor, per institution. And credit union CDs are also insured through the National Credit Union Administration with the same limits. | A certificate of deposit, also known as a CD, is a type of bank account. It involves placing a deposit with a financial institution for a certain amount of time. CDs generally pay fixed interest rates that are determined upon opening the account. | pegasus | 1 | https://news.yahoo.com/does-certificate-deposit-cd-143000911.html | 0.448135 |
How Does a Certificate of Deposit (CD) Work? | A certificate of deposit, or CD, can help you get more interest from your idle cash. Heres what you need to know about them. Image Credit: Getty Images A certificate of deposit, also known as a CD, is a type of bank account that involves placing a deposit with a financial institution for a certain amount of time. For this reason, a CD is often referred to as a time-deposit account. The ending date of a CD account is known as its maturity date, and the entire account balance is generally removed when this date is reached. CDs generally pay fixed interest rates that are determined upon opening the account, and while the interest rates paid by CDs generally depend on market conditions, they can vary significantly between financial institutions. CDs vs. Savings accounts While a CD is technically a type of savings account, it differs from a traditional bank savings account in a few important ways -- some include: The most obvious difference between a CD and a savings account is that youre committing to leaving your money in the CD for a certain amount of time. CD term lengths generally range from a few months to about five years, although shorter or longer terms may be available. With a savings account, you are free to withdraw your money whenever youd like. Because youre committing to leave your funds on deposit, banks typically pay higher interest rates on CDs than they do on savings accounts. And, the longer the term of the CD, the higher the interest rate it will typically pay. There is generally no such thing as a partial withdrawal from a CD. For example, if you deposit $1,000 into a savings account, you can choose to withdraw a portion of it and leave the rest in the account. With a CD, your withdrawal generally has to be for the entire amount, even if you decide to access your funds before the maturity date and accept a penalty. The interest rate paid by a CD depends on a few factors. For one, overall financial market conditions tend to influence CD yields. Specifically, if the Federal Reserve raises interest rates, CD yields will generally rise across the board. On the other hand, when the Federal Reserve lowers interest rates, CD yields tend to fall. Having said that, the type of financial institution offering the CD also plays a big role. Brick-and-mortar banks tend to have lower CD yields than credit unions, for example. And, online financial institutions tend to have the best CD yields of all. As an example, as of Nov. 5, 2018, the national average interest rate for a 12-month CD was 0.49%. Meanwhile, Marcus by Goldman Sachs offers an annual percentage yield, or APY, of 2.55% -- more than five times the average. Its very important to shop around for the best rates as the variation between institutions can be substantial. Additionally, its important to mention that CD interest compounds throughout the term. For example, lets say that you deposit $1,000 in a five-year CD that has an annual percentage yield of 3%. This means that at the end of the first year, your CD would be worth $1,030. Then during the second year, you would earn 3% on $1,030. Over time, this can really add a significant amount to your returns if you choose a CD with a longer maturity. Jumbo CDs If you have a lot of money to deposit, you may be able to obtain a so-called Jumbo CD. Many financial institutions are willing to pay higher interest rates for Jumbo CDs, but not all of them do, so if you have a large deposit, be sure to inquire about Jumbo CD rates. Jumbo CDs are generally defined as a minimum deposit amount of $100,000, but many institutions have lower thresholds that pay preferable interest rates. CDs as retirement investments Its also important to mention that you can hold CDs in certain retirement accounts, such as individual retirement accounts, or IRAs. If you put your money in a CD with a bank, the interest your account earns is generally considered taxable income. However, if your CD is held in an IRA or other tax-advantaged retirement account, you wont have to worry about paying tax on the interest you receive on an annual basis. If you invest in a CD through a tax-deferred retirement account like a traditional IRA, your account deposit may be tax deductible, and you wont have to worry about any income taxes on your interest income until you make a withdrawal from the account. Or, if you invest through an after-tax account like a Roth IRA, your contributions wont be deductible, but qualified withdrawals from the account (including your interest income) will be 100% tax-free. If were defining risk as the potential loss of your deposit, the answer is almost certainly no. Bank CDs are FDIC-insured up to $250,000 per depositor, per institution. And credit union CDs are also insured through the National Credit Union Administration with the same limits. | A certificate of deposit, also known as a CD, is a type of bank account that involves placing a deposit with a financial institution for a certain amount of time. CDs generally pay fixed interest rates that are determined upon opening the account, and they can vary significantly between financial institutions. | ctrlsum | 2 | https://news.yahoo.com/does-certificate-deposit-cd-143000911.html | 0.537926 |
Did I overstep when I gave unsolicited advice to my sons soccer teammate? | The question My 12-year-old son plays soccer and at a recent practice I made two comments to the goalkeeper about mistakes he was making. I was wearing ear buds at the time and apparently I was louder than I would ordinarily have been. I said: You should roll the ball out with more vigour and it wont be picked off." And after several went through his hands into the net: You should tip those over the bar. Fairly innocuous but, true, totally unsolicited. The reason I spoke to him was he was frustrated with his play and was pounding the turf and punching the posts, so I thought I could help him. And Ive coached this team, though I do not know this boy. But the boy didnt appreciate my comments and told me to stop talking to him. The following day at their game I offered the parents an apology and the mom accepted but I felt some lingering resentment then and still do almost one month later. I get the cold shoulder: no eye contact, smiles or greetings. The mom also is the club co-ordinator and when the soccer kits were given out, all I got was a T-shirt with no socks or shorts and a perfunctory explanation. I now feel tense going to watch my boy practise and play and cant imagine how this can go on. The answer I scarcely know where to begin. First of all, take your ear buds out of your ears, bud, when youre talking to people. I do not understand this modern phenomenon of leaving them in but to me it seems the height of rudeness. Especially since you approached the kid, not the other way around. Second, unsolicited is the lowest form of advice. Maybe teachers and parents can get away with it. I would use this as a teaching moment and never, ever try to foist your counsel on anyone ever again unless they ask you for it. I dont even like unsolicited comments. It so happens I wear shorts well into the fall. Oh-ho-ho shorts in October eh? some total stranger on the street will say, snapping me out of whatever reverie I might have been enjoying. Youre quite eccentric! I know they mean no harm, but its annoying. Because I could offer a few about you. (Of course I dont.) And your target and timing couldnt possibly have been worse. Story continues below advertisement Story continues below advertisement To be a goaltender, as I know from having a hockey-goalie son, is a highly emotional and pressure-filled thing to be. You feel the entire weight of the games outcome on your shoulders and know your teammates kind of feel the same way. Youre a hero. They cant even look you in the eyes. Ive seen it many times. Ive also seen my son let in an easy one, costing his team the game and subsequently throw himself face-down on the ice and weep. Unwise. Im surprised the kid didnt tell you off in stronger language. And Im not surprised the mom is giving you the cold shoulder and stiffed you on the shorts and socks. Well, I know from bitter experience what its like having someone who hardly knows you form a dislike for you. It can really prey on your mind. But I wouldnt keep trying to reapproach them. Give them a wide berth for a while, be kind and friendly if you do encounter them, and see if the passage of time solves it, soothes it and acts as a balm. Story continues below advertisement After all, I know Ive been giving you a hard time, but in the grand scheme of things, its a pretty minor and obviously well-intentioned infraction. Maybe theyll come around to seeing that. If not, well, something I learned a long time ago: Not everyone can like you. You might just have to learn to live with their frostiness. Send your dilemmas to damage@globeandmail.com. Please keep your submissions to 150 words and include a daytime contact number so we can follow up with any queries. Live your best. We have a daily Life & Arts newsletter, providing you with our latest stories on health, travel, food and culture. Sign up today. | My 12-year-old son plays soccer and at a recent practice I made two comments to the goalkeeper about mistakes he was making. The boy didnt appreciate my comments and told me to stop talking to him. | pegasus | 1 | https://www.theglobeandmail.com/life/relationships/article-did-i-overstep-when-i-gave-unsolicited-advice-to-my-sons-soccer/ | 0.102761 |
Subsets and Splits
No community queries yet
The top public SQL queries from the community will appear here once available.