US consumer spending up 0.2 percent in January

WASHINGTON (AP) ? U.S. consumers increased spending modestly in January but cut back on major purchases that signal confidence in the economy. The decline in spending on goods suggests higher tax rates that kicked in on Jan. 1 may have made consumers more cautious.

The Commerce Department said Friday that consumer spending rose 0.2 percent in January compared with December. The gain was driven by an increase in spending on services, partly reflecting higher heating bills. Spending on durable goods, such as cars and appliances, fell 0.8 percent. Spending on non-durable goods, such as clothing, was essentially flat.

Income plunged 3.6 percent in January, the biggest drop since January 1993. But it followed a 2.6 percent rise in December, which reflected a rush by companies to pay dividends and bonuses before income taxes increased on top earners.

After-tax income fell 4 percent in January and after having risen 2.7 percent in December. Part of the January drop reflected higher Social Security taxes.

Americans adjusted to higher taxes by saving less. The savings rate declined to 2.4 percent of after-tax income in January, down from 6.4 percent in December and the lowest in five years.

"The sting of higher taxes hit home at the start of the year. This will cool spending in the next few months before consumers adjust to higher rates," predicted Jennifer Lee, senior economist at BMO Capital Markets.

In January, Congress and the White House allowed a temporary 2 percentage point cut in Social Security taxes to expire. That means a person earning $50,000 a year will have about $1,000 less to spend in 2013. A household with two high-paid workers will have up to $4,500 less.

Lawmakers and the Obama administration also agreed to let income tax rates rise on top-earning Americans.

Paul Dales, senior U.S. economist at Capital Economics, said that spending growth in the first three months of this year could slow to just half of the 2.1 percent rate of increase seen in the October-December quarter. Consumer spending drives nearly 70 percent of economy activity.

A better job market may help offset some of the pain from the tax increase later this year.

Employers have added an average of 200,000 jobs a month from November through January. That was up from about 150,000 in the previous three months. And a drop in weekly applications for unemployment benefits suggests employers may have stepped up hiring further in February.

Sustained hiring, along with increases in home construction and business investment, could also support growth at a crucial time. The federal government is facing the automatic spending cuts that kick in Friday. If the cuts remain in place for an extended period, they could crimp growth.

The economy is coming off its weakest quarter of growth in nearly two years, according to a government report released Thursday. The Commerce Department estimated that the economy grew at an annual rate of just 0.1 percent in the October-December quarter, much slower than the 3.1 percent growth in the July-September quarter.

Still, economists said the weakness in the fourth quarter was caused by temporary factors ? deep defense spending cuts and slower restocking by companies. They expect growth will rebound to a rate of around 2 percent in the current January-March quarter.

They note that residential construction, consumer spending and business investment ? core drivers of growth ? all improved in the fourth quarter.

Businesses and consumers are also showing greater confidence despite the automatic spending cuts scheduled to take effect on Friday. A measure of consumer confidence rebounded in February after a sharp fall the previous month that likely was a result of the tax increase.

Companies, meanwhile, sharply increased orders in January for a category of long-lasting manufactured goods that reflect their investment plans. That suggests they are confident about their business prospects.

The consumer spending report showed that inflation remains subdued. A price gauge tied to consumer purchases showed no increase in January and since January 2012 is up just 1.2 percent. That's the lowest 12-month increase since October 2009.

Source: http://news.yahoo.com/us-consumer-spending-0-2-percent-january-133724544--finance.html

forrest gump bernard hopkins nfl draft grades devils dodgers rachel maddow gia

After Newtown, states slow to embrace new gun laws - U.S. News

By Matthew DeLuca, Staff Writer, NBC News

Months after the mass shooting at Sandy Hook Elementary School, new state-level restrictions on guns have been slow in coming, and they?ve mostly been concentrated in a handful of states that already have tough gun laws.

Meanwhile, lawmakers in at least a half-dozen other states have gone the other way, proposing and in some instances passing bills that would expand where and when a person can be in possession of a firearm.

But for residents in the vast majority of states, gun ownership looks unlikely to change much absent federal legislation.?

A person can still buy a pistol at a Nevada gun show without a background check or carry a rifle inside the New Hampshire state house, just as he or she could before Adam Lanza brought a Bushmaster .223 rifle into a Newtown, Conn., elementary school and opened fire.

?There has been activity in other states that one might not ordinarily think of -- Colorado, for example,? said Jon Vernick, co-director of the Johns Hopkins Center for Gun Policy and Research. But there remain ?the Idahos of the world, where really little has changed since Newtown.?

Gun-control advocates had high hopes that the Newtown tragedy would serve as a galvanizing moment for the country. Dan Gross, president of the Brady Campaign to Prevent Gun Violence, said at the time that he hoped it would be a ?catalyst to demand the sensible change.?

While recent mass shootings do appear to have moved public opinion ? a recent NBC News/Wall Street Journal poll found American support for stricter gun laws at its highest level in a decade ? there has not been a rush at the state level to embrace sweeping new gun laws.

And most of the dozen or so states where significant new restrictions have been proposed already have a ?C+? rating or above from the Law Center to Prevent Gun Violence, putting them among the nation?s top states for gun control.

?Most of the viable proposals on the federal level and in most states would have very little impact on self-defense,? said UCLA law professor Eugene Volokh. ?But pretty much all the gun control proposals out there are not going to be terribly effective at combating criminals.?

In New Jersey, several lawmakers began calling for new gun laws in the immediate aftermath of the Newtown shooting, even though the state already has an A- rating from the Law Center to Prevent Gun Violence. Legislators voted a raft of bills through the Democrat-controlled state assembly on Feb. 22, including a ban on .50 caliber weapons and a 10-round magazine limit. Those bills may still be held up by a hesitant Senate and Republican governor.

?We?re going to take a hard look at the bills the Assembly did,? New Jersey Senate President Stephen Sweeney said in an interview with Philadelphia radio station 106.9FM. ?Some might be changed, some might not go through at all.?

At the same time, lawmakers in Wyoming, South Dakota, Kansas, Tennessee, Texas, and Arizona all moved to loosen their controls on firearms, in many cases thumbing their nose at prospective federal legislation.

An Arkansas bill allowing holders of concealed-carry permits to bring their gun into churches was signed into law by Governor Mike Beebe, a Democrat, on Feb. 11.

First sponsored by state Senator Bryan King, the Church Protection Act passed the state?s Republican-controlled Senate by an overwhelming majority. In Kentucky, the state Senate voted 34 to 3 on Feb. 25 to approve a bill outlawing the enforcement of federal gun laws that do not yet exist.

The most aggressive gun-control legislative action so far has come in New York, where Gov. Andrew Cuomo championed one of the nation?s toughest bans on assault weapons, the first to come in the wake of Newtown. But the state already boasted gun laws that were among the nation?s toughest.

Even in states seared by recent tragedies, lawmakers have found their progress slowed.

After Connecticut lawmakers failed to coalesce around any of the gun laws offered in the days after Newtown, Democratic Gov. Dan Malloy introduced his own proposal and vowed to shove it through.

Lawmakers are trying to forge a bipartisan consensus but they are finding it difficult. ?I would hope that we would have a broadly supported bipartisan bill, but I think it?s more important that we have a strong bill that meets the need,? said Sen. Majority Leader Martin Looney, a Democrat.

In Colorado, home of the Aurora theater shooting, House lawmakers advanced gun-control bills after some last-minute lobbying from Joe Biden, drawing the wrath of Republicans.

The bills would mandate universal background checks, ban magazines with more than 15 rounds, and allow college campuses to prohibit concealed carry. With the Senate planning to vote soon, the magazine maker Magpul Industries threatened to abandon its plant 28 miles from Denver?if the proposed magazine limit is put into law.

?Colorado is in a unique position in that we have suffered these tragedies firsthand, so there is a drumbeat in Colorado,? said Colorado Senate President John Morse, a Democrat. ?I think the governor will be in support of all of these bills once we get them to his desk.?

Passing a bill expanding gun rights can be complicated, too, as Wyoming State Representative Kendell Kroeker, a Republican, found out.

He got a bill passed in the state House of Representatives that would have made it illegal for anyone to enforce any new federal law that placed restrictions on guns, ammunition, or other firearms accessories within the borders of the state.

That bill died amid questions of its constitutionality, Kroeker said. But the response from his constituents was ?overwhelmingly positive,? he added.

Whether gun ownership changes for most Americans may come down to actions taken on the national level, as hesitant state lawmakers wait for a cue from Washington. The Senate Judiciary Committee put a one-week hold on prospective federal gun bills on Thursday.

Related:

Gun stores running low on weapons as sales surge

Anger, violent thoughts: Are you too sick to own a gun?

Source: http://usnews.nbcnews.com/_news/2013/03/02/17151151-after-newtown-states-slow-to-embrace-new-gun-laws

cspan state of the union drinking game oscar noms capital gains tim thomas oral roberts les paul

Physicists demonstrate the acceleration of electrons by a laser in a vacuum

Friday, March 1, 2013

Accelerating a free electron with a laser has been a longtime goal of solid-state physicists.

David Cline, a distinguished professor in the UCLA Department of Physics and Astronomy, and Xiaoping Ding, an assistant researcher at UCLA, have conducted research at Brookhaven National Laboratory in New York and have established that an electron beam can be accelerated by a laser in free space.

This has never been done before at high energies and represents a significant breakthrough, Cline said, adding that it also may have implications for fusion as a new energy source.

In free space, a plane-wave laser is unable to accelerate an electron, according to the Lawson?Woodward theorem, posited in 1979. However, Yu-kun Ho, a professor at China's Fudan University in Shanghai, and his research group have proposed a concept of what physicists refer to as the capture?acceleration scenario to show that an electron can be accelerated by a tightly focused laser in a vacuum.

In the capture?acceleration scenario, the diffraction from a tightly focused laser changes not only the intensity distribution of the laser but also its phase distribution, which results in the field phase velocity being lower than the speed of light in a vacuum in some areas.

Thus, a channel that overlaps features of both strong longitudinal electric field and low?laser-phase velocity is created, and electrons can receive energy gain from the laser. The acceleration effect increases along with increasing laser intensity, Cline said. This channel for electrons may be useful for other scientific endeavors, such as guiding an electron beam into a specific region of laser fusion applications, he said.

A possible application of this discovery is the use of laser plasma fusion to provide a new energy source for the U.S. and other countries. The focus of the laser generates a natural channel that can capture electrons and drive them into a pellet that explodes, by fusion, to produce excess energy, Cline said.

With federal funding from the U.S. Department of Energy, a project to carry out a proof-of-principle beam test for the novel vacuum acceleration at Brookhaven National Laboratory's Accelerator Test Facility (BNL-ATF) has been proposed and approved ? a collaboration among the UCLA Center for Advanced Accelerators, of which Cline is principal investigator, Ho's group and the Accelerator Test Facility team.

BNL-ATF is one of the few facilities that can provide both a high-quality electron beam and a high-intensity laser beam for the beam test, Cline said. Ho's group provides theoretical support. UCLA scientists ? Cline, Ding and Lei Shao, a former UCLA physics graduate student of Cline's ? are responsible for the whole experiment and the experimental data analysis.

Simulation research work and hardware design have been done in accordance with BNL-ATF's experimental conditions. The simulation results predict that vacuum laser acceleration phenomena can be observed with ATF's diagnostic system.

Cline, Ding, Ho and their colleagues published two papers last month on this research: "Simulation Prediction and Experiment Setup of Vacuum Laser Acceleration at Brookhaven National Lab-Accelerator Test Facility," in the journal Nuclear Instruments and Methods in Physics Research A, and the discovery paper "First Observation of Acceleration of Electrons by a Laser in a Vacuum," in the Journal of Modern Physics.

The major result of the experiment is to show the increase of beam energy caused by the laser, as illustrated in the attached graph of data collected from the spectrometer on beam line No. 1 at BNL-ATF. Each row of two frames represents one snapshot-pair of "laser on" (right side) and "laser off" (left side) with unchanged configuration. One can see a clear increase from these pictures, proof that the laser accelerates the 20 mega-electron-volts electron beam in vacuum. The length of the beam image reveals the energy spread of the beam. The experiment recorded 30 shots. Twenty shots were high-intensity and showed effects of the laser on/laser off difference. Four shot examples are shown in the graph.

###

University of California - Los Angeles: http://www.newsroom.ucla.edu

Thanks to University of California - Los Angeles for this article.

This press release was posted to serve as a topic for discussion. Please comment below. We try our best to only post press releases that are associated with peer reviewed scientific literature. Critical discussions of the research are appreciated. If you need help finding a link to the original article, please contact us on twitter or via e-mail.

This press release has been viewed 13 time(s).

Source: http://www.labspaces.net/127064/Physicists_demonstrate_the_acceleration_of_electrons_by_a_laser_in_a_vacuum_

larry brown thomas kinkade pat summit brewers matt cain adastra holocaust remembrance day

Video: Sequester skirmish: Obama, congressional leaders meet

>>> good evening. i'm michael smerconish in for chris matthews . leading off tonight, who say frad of the big bad sequester? no one apparently. certainly not the financial markets with the dow near it's all-time high. in fact, both political parties maybe more okay with the big budget cuts than you'd think. the democrats get to cut the pentagon and protect their social programs and republicans get to cut spending. right now president obama is convinced republicans will pay the price for endangering the recovery while protecting the wealthy but what if he's wrong.

>>> also, let's go to the audio tape . now we can actually hear supreme court justice antonin scalia calling the voting rights act a quote racial entitlement. that one phrase has stirred the anger of who of his more liberal colleagues and may set up some big left/right confrontations.

>>> plus, the marn toward marriage equality just got a big boost. the obama administration has joined the fight urging the supreme court to overturn proposition 8 , california's ban on same-sex marriage.

>>> and look who just emerged from the mittness protection program, mitt romney , who has just done his first tv interview since the election. the question is do even republicans want to hear from him anymore?

>>> and, finally, let me finish with a vote for transparency where it matters the most.

>>> let's begin with the politics of those automatic spending cuts going into effect today. david corn is washington bureau chief for mother jones . michael steele is the former chairman of the rnc and both are msnbc political analysts. gentlemen, the president came out swinging at republicans today after his meeting with congressional leadership blaming them for the cuts that he referred to as dumb.

>> what's important to understand is that not everyone will feel the pain of these cuts right away. the pain though will be real. so every time that we get a piece of economic news over the next month, next two months, next six months, as long as the sequester is in place, we'll know that that economic news could have been better if congress had not failed to act. and let's be clear, none of this is necessary. it's happening because a choice that republicans in congress have made. i have offered negotiations around that kind of balanced approach, and so far we've gotten rebuffed because what speaker boehner and the republicans have said is we cannot do any revenue. we can't do a dime's worth of revenue. so what more do you think i should do? i am not a dictator. i am the president.

>> and on the other end of pennsylvania avenue , we didn't hear much hopefulness coming from speaker boehner either. david gregory sat down with him for an interview that will air sunday on "meet the press. ".

>> as we sit here friday afternoon, you have emerged from a meeting at the white house . there is no deal. take me inside the room. what happened?

>> very nice, polite discussion, but i had asked the president and senator reid to come with a plan to replace the sequester. listen, we've known about this for 16 months. and yet even today there's no plan from senate democrats or the white house to replace the sequester. and over the last 10 months house republicans have acted twice to replace the sequester.

>> in the end you don't really see a pathway here that's open as you sit here.

>> if i did, the meeting at the white house this morning might have gone better.

>> michael steele what strikes me as significant is that this week there didn't seem to be any real effort to avoid this. it was all for show. they came in, what, tuesday through thursday. the house was gone by last night.

>> yeah.

>> so when did they cut it loose and decide, man, we can't save this?

>> weeks ago, weeks ago. this drama has been unfolding for, like the speaker said, 16 months, but everyone i think kind of came to a general conscientious, just let it happen and then we'll deal with it afterwards weeks ago. look, both sides have an opportunity here to move this thing forward. the president instead of having the meeting today could have had the meeting on monday. you know, sort of lead into what was going to happen at midnight tonight. that didn't happen. it's because everybody -- you set it up right. the democrats are going to, you know, they can say what they want about republicans on this. republicans got the defense cuts they want. you know, everybody is looking at the --

>> is it faux outrage then?

>> i don't think it's faux outrage in terms of the impact this is going to have. when the president says there are going to be some real consequences here, fewer food inspectors, 71,000 kids won't get into head start , maybe not until september, you know, 20% of salary cuts for federal workers impacting local economies . that's all very real. but i have to call out boehner because he's playing this sort of i think a dirtier game than the president. he goes, i just need a plan. give me a plan, mr. president. give me a plan, mr. senate majority leader. the democrats in the senate yesterday voted for a plan. it got 51 votes. it didn't pass because republicans filibustered. there is a plan. the president for 16 months has been pushing a plan. close tax loopholes and put that money to deficit reduction and have a different set of not indiscriminate cuts. that's his plan.

>> do you accept the criticism of boehner .

>> boehner keeps saying where is the plan. he just doesn't like the plan.

>> that may be true, but the house put two plans on the floor. they were voted on. they weren't voted on in the senate. you know, yeah, the senate voted --

>> their plan was to take all the cuts out in the military and put nem in social --

>> but, david, you have to start some place and the problems is democrats don't want to start where you need to start and that is having an honest conversation about what are you prepared to cut, david corn ? what are you prepared to cut, president obama ? what are you prepared to put on the table? we've given you $600 billion in january in new revenue with no cuts. so show me some cuts and then we can start talking about how serious you are.

>> 16 months ago the president against some of the desires of people within his own party did put things on the table. changed cpi for social security , medicare cuts. he did, and they came up with --

>> he used the words. he didn't put a plan. what was the specific amount of chain cpi? what was the number.

>> >> these were numbers passed between gene sperling and boehner 's office 37.

>> here is what i don't like. it suits each of their political objects tiffs. i want to use chuck todd . i have been saying it but he said it beautifully. he noted this in first read this morning. yes, both sides are kicking and screaming publicly, and yes these cuts will impact people's livelihoods but if you're a republican who wants to cut spending, you're getting your spending cuts. if you're a democrat who either wants to reduce defense spending or ensure that all the cuts aren't targeted only at social programs, you're getting your wish. this is perhaps the biggest reason why these cuts are going into effect, at the end of the day they were better than the alternative for republicans raising tax locals and eliminating loopholes, for democrats having the spinding cuts come exclusively from social spending . you're shaking your head. tonight republicans are already back in their districts and they're able to say we cut spendingd.

>> i absolutely agree with chuck. i think he's framed this perfectly. that's why i said they settled on this weeks ago. so all this drama and his tir ronnics, the world is coming to an end, kids won't get educated.

>> to go back to where i started, there was nothing consequential done because it suited their interests.

>> i agree with the political analysis but the problem we have is this is about the most immature way of approaching real problems that we have in this country. and i do believe -- you know, you can go to people like norm oranstein and thomas man who are centrists who say the conflicts within the republican's own side have made them tougher partners to get involved in a deal with the president and that's where we've been for the last two years, where we are now. bain ser asking for plans because he can't really cut a compromise.

>> let me put a period on this. we're not going to move beyond this conversation and the one we see unfolded this week until both sides realize each of them, their stuff stinks. the president's stuff stinks --

>> what's that going to take?

>> it's going to take the realization and i think it's going to be in 30 to 45 days when some of the cuts begin to trickle into the economy and people begin to feel it, that pressure is going to come back. the president is playing a real gamble here because i don't think this is all going to fall neatly on the republicans ' lap. this thing is going sto get spread on --

>> here is something else --

>> but if you look -- sorry, michael , but if you look at what the public says about how to solve that --

>> that's what they say today. let's see that they're saying in four weeks.

>> for 9 last year they have been --

>> guys, here is something that baffles me, it's what the market is doing. if the economy is going to feel the effects of the spending cuts, the markets sure haven't been scared yet. the dow closed just under 14,090 inching closer to the record of a little more than 14,164. i always think that these masters of the universe on wall street , they have it figured out, they're three steps ahead of us. why aren't they nervous?

>> didn't we learn in october 2007 that they're not always three steps ahead and they don't know what they're doing? they don't know what they're talking about? irrational exuberance? remember that? i think they have gotten used to the fact that washington has these manufactured crises. we have one cliff after another, and that they tend to sort of be worked out on a temporary basis. at pom point that might stop helping.

>> michael , whas your explanation?

>> it may stop happening but i think they've baked all of this into their form layings for the next few months. they know what's going to happen. we have fiscal cliff part deux or whatever you want to call it in the next few weeks. they know what the deal is. they're like let's ride this thing. when the boys and girls in the playground decide to come and do what they need to do --

>> i can't let the week end with the "a" team sitting on "hardball" without mentioning two boards, bob woodward . quickly the take on how that impacted this whole sfertion?

>> i'm in this business largely because of bob woodward , i was a big fan of his during watergate. i think it was unfortunate. he made too much of a deal over what gene wrote. it wasn't a threat. it was an apology. i think politico hyped it up because it makes good ratings, good for clicks and it became a temp pest in a teapot that evaporated just as right wing talk radio and tv was trying to make a big deal out of it.

>> what i didn't like was when woodward read allowed on politico from the e-mail he left out the words as a friend which i thought changed the whole meaning of it.

>> i'm sorry, i'm really sorry.

>> you ought to see my e-mail day to day . this is>> i have gotten treatment from the white house , this white house when they haven't like what i have said that is far worse than that. i would like to get notes like that.

>> michael , on the fundamental issue, woodward's the most credible of individuals to say, hey, this was the president's idea.

>> and that's the real rub for the white house and for everyone. this was the president's idea. it came from his economic team. so, okay, let's get past that --

>> everyone accepted it --

>> this is the point. the bottom line is when you got the left trashing bob woodward and the right embracing we're in a whole new landscape, folks.

>> thank you both for being here. michael steele and david corn . we appreciate you. coming up, we were stunned to read what supreme court justice antonin scalia had to say about the landmark voting rights act , that it's an example of a racial entitlement. now we can hear scalia speak for himself and the other justices who challenged him. this is "hardball," the place for politics. with the spark miles

Source: http://video.msnbc.msn.com/hardball/51011836/

super bowl matthew broderick tax refund calculator huntington disease west memphis three taxes game of thrones season 2 trailer

Customer Service Is Head & Shoulders Above When You've Got ...

Thousands of company leaders around the world ask: Does customer service truly differentiate a company ? head and shoulders ? above the competition? Do customers return to companies because of customer service?

These leaders raise the issue from a financial perspective.

Well, there are many companies out there ? from Ritz Carlton, Chick Fil-A, Zappos and Nordstroms, to lesser known mid-size companies that have thrived for decades ? that prove the answer to the question is a clear ?yes?.

Yet despite volumes of research-based statistics and financial proof, the question persists. When leaders who have seen the numbers ask me this question, my answer is:

?Customer service differentiates you head & shoulders above the competition when you?ve got the customer?s back!?

Let?s look at this phenomenon both in the business-to-business (B2B) world and the business-to- consumer (B2C) world.

B2B

You are a CEO or you own a company. You are looking for a supplier or distributor for a very important strategic aspect of the business. ?Whom do you choose?

1. One w/ great ?financials and market position.
2. One w/ proven track record of service in the industry ?
3. ?One who has #1 & #2 AND ??understands your business and ?shows you they will ?have your back?.

?The issue for you is trust that your best interest is also in their best interest!?

This is the true definition of customer service.? Customer service is not a department. It?s not a team of agents or sales reps. It?s not a low level function of handling problems and exceptions.

Customer service is a relationship of trust that exists in every aspect of business interaction.

Trust differentiates your company head and shoulders above the other companies when you show the customers you ?have their back?.

B2C

In the everyday consumer world, the customer asks the same key question: Will my best interest be in their best interest?? Will this company ? whoever they are ? put my needs first and succeed through meeting my needs?

The more important the product/service is to the customer, the greater the influence customer service has on the decision.

How does a customer define importance? Is it just the price? Everyone connects high customer service expectations with high cost products and services (e.g. Ritz Carlton, Nordstrom etc.)

It goes far beyond that. It also includes:

• The emotional impact on the customer
  Does it ease my stress? Help my family? Lift me out of a rut?

• The disruptive effect on life
  Will it positively or negatively affect my day? My plans? My life? Will I have to attack to get what I need and want?

• ?The customer?s identity
  Does it fit with who I am? Does it ?support I want to be seen, and what I want the world to know about me

• The risk of the decision to avoid buyer?s remorse
  Regardless of the price, can I trust that this is the right decision? I don?t want to feel the burden of regret.

• The desire to celebrate and feel happy
  If I want to feel happy, will the company take me down with their selfish narcissism.

Customer service ? the relationship of trust shown in every interaction ? puts your company head and shoulders about the competition when you show the customer you have their back.

Listen, understand, engage, connect, and deliver. Throw away the robotic scripts and get personal.? That?s when you will see customer service contribute to your bottom line.

?

?2013 Kate Nasser, CAS, Inc. This post was written specifically for the SwitchandShift blog. If you wish to repost or republish this, please email info@katenasser.com and thank you for respecting intellectual capital.

?

Kate Nasser (2 Posts)

Kate Nasser, The People-Skills Coach?, inspires leaders and teams in large & mid-size corporations to the heights of service and performance. Her special focus for 20+ years in keynotes, workshops, and consulting has been turning interaction obstacles into supreme success. Kate's latest DVD -- Customer Service USA: Regional Differences That Make a Difference -- shows you how to have your customer's back! Kate invites you to join the people skills chat on Twitter (#peopleskills) every Sunday 10am ET/3pm GMT and click on the icons below to connect with her on Twitter, Facebook, Google +, LinkedIn, Pinterest. Kate has a B.S. in Mathematics and a Masters in Org. Psychology.

Source: http://switchandshift.com/customer-service-is-head-shoulders-above-when-youve-got-their-back?utm_source=rss&utm_medium=rss&utm_campaign=customer-service-is-head-shoulders-above-when-youve-got-their-back

Super Bowl Winners what time does the superbowl start Kaepernick Tattoos superbowl time what time is the super bowl world war z groundhog day

Then and Now: Moving Homes in Corona

In the true sense of ?green? building, Corona has a long and successful history of relocating structures so that they can be reused and appreciated by later citizens of Corona.? The top photo on the attached flyer shows how home?re-locations?were done in the early days. Corona?s first Santa Fe Depot is seen in the background behind the house and family members that are being towed by a team of horses.

?A Brief History of Relocated Structures

We know that the building now located at 507 Vicentia (Settlement House) [MAP] was relocated three times.? It was built on the original Lincoln School campus at Tenth and Victoria; then moved to Corona?s first High School in the 1200 block of Main Street [MAP]; then to the original Washington School at Second Street and West Grand Boulevard[MAP], where it served as a Kindergarten classroom; and ultimately adjacent to Corona?s Second High School where it was used as the band room. This same building was later became the Police Department storage room for evidence, and currently it serves as the Settlement House at 507 Vicentia Avenue [MAP].? We know that the very earliest structure used by the First Congregational Church was relocated to a spot on the north side of East Sixth Street.

Among the homes known to have been moved are:? Captain Gully?s home on Sixth Street near Victoria was moved to the east side of Main Street at Francis. Dr. Huff?s home on the northwest corner of Washburn at Sixth Street was relocated to the northeast corner of Merrill and Seventh Street [MAP].? More recently, Harmony Antiques (the former Frazer-Dixon residence) once found at 916 W. Sixth Street [MAP], took a short trip around the Circle and found a new home on the East side of Grand Blvd. near Fullerton.? The Call Ranch House was relocated from the west side of California Avenue near Ontario to Corona Heritage Park.? The home of early Corona volunteer firefighter Joseph Brumbaugh was relocated from the south side of Seventh Street near Sheridan and?re-purposed?as a guest house at the rear of another historic property located at 1052 East Grand [MAP]. A historic Victorian ranch house once found amid citrus groves at 2342 Gilbert [MAP], was cut into four sections to be moved and then relocated and reassembled on a lot near Lake Mathews.

In the past, many of Corona?s historic old buildings have met the wrecking ball. ?If uprooted and relocated, these mementos from the past might have been preserved and maintained so that their craftsmanship might still be honored today.

Two homes are in dire need of being moved so that the Corona Regional Medical Center, which is very important to our community, might be able to complete a desired update and expansion. Corona Historic Preservation Society members hope that the buildings that need to be moved will have similar happy landings as those mentioned above.

If you or anyone you know might be interested in this opportunity, please contact Jeff Tupper whose contact information is listed on the flyer.

Did you like this? Share it:

Source: http://www.innercirclecorona.com/then-and-now-moving-homes-in-corona/

steven tyler tropic thunder carnie wilson missing reese witherspoon pregnant billy joel bent

Lew set to start at Treasury amid budget crisis

WASHINGTON (AP) ? Jacob Lew is scheduled to be sworn in Thursday as Treasury secretary and will have to hit the ground running.

He is taking over the job just a day before huge automatic government spending cuts are set to take effect. He's likely to be involved with any negotiations to reverse the cuts, and also in budget talks next month to continue funding the government.

The Senate confirmed Lew late Wednesday, affirming President Barack Obama's choice of a budget expert at a time when Congress and the White House are at odds over spending and taxes.

"At this critical time for our economy and our country, there is no one more qualified for this position than Jack," Obama said in a statement issued after the Senate vote. "His reputation as a master of fiscal issues who can work with leaders on both sides of the aisle has already helped him succeed in some of the toughest jobs in Washington."

The vote was 71 to 26 to support the nomination. Voting against Lew's confirmation were 25 Republicans and independent Bernie Sanders of Vermont.

Lew, 57, had most recently served as Obama's chief of staff. He succeeds Timothy Geithner, who completed a tumultuous four-year term in which he helped lead the administration's response to the financial crisis and recession.

Lew began his government service in the 1980s as an aide to House Speaker Tip O'Neill. He brings nearly three decades of government service to the job, including two stints as White House budget director.

Republican Sen. Jeff Sessions of Alabama, who opposed the nomination, said Lew as budget director was the architect of the Obama's administration's failed efforts to get soaring deficits under control.

During his confirmation hearing, Lew signaled no major economic policy changes. He advocated a balanced approach to reducing the long-term budget deficit through spending cuts and additional tax revenue.

He said he would be open to reforms to Medicare, but he didn't spell out any details. Lew also said he would work with the committee on a rewrite of the tax code.

Beyond the budget, Lew is expected to hew closely to the positions Geithner struck on Europe's debt crisis, the U.S. relationship with China and the administration's defense of the Dodd-Frank financial overhaul law that the banking industry has fought to weaken.

Some Republicans voted against Lew because they were not satisfied with his answers about his previous employment with Citigroup, including a brief time when he was chief operating officer for an investment unit in 2008. The unit has been criticized for making risky investments that imploded during the financial crisis. And Lew received a bonus of nearly $1 million in early 2009, a time when Citi was being bailed out by taxpayers.

Lew told the panel that he didn't make decisions about the investments being offered to clients. He said his bonus reflected compensation for his work.

Sen. Charles Grassley, R-Iowa, opposed Lew's nomination. He cited questions about his time at Citi, as well as Lew's compensation while working as chief operating officer at New York University.

"Mr. Lew's eagerness and skill in obtaining bonuses, severance payments, housing allowances and other perks raises concerns about whether he appreciates who pays the bills," Grassley said.

One potential weakness for Lew: His relative inexperience with financial markets and international economic crises ? areas that had played to Geithner's background. Analysts think Lew will keep pressuring Europe to deal aggressively with its budget and debt issues. But they think this will consume less of his time given that Europe's debt crisis now poses less of a threat to the global economy.

On trade, Lew is expected to keep prodding China. The U.S. trade gap with the world's second-largest economy hit another record high last year. No breakthrough is expected, though.

Lew will also need to calm investors who have grown concerned about possible currency wars after Japan's new government sought to lower the value of the yen as a way to boost exports and its weak economy. A weaker yen makes Japanese goods cheaper overseas and foreign goods costlier in Japan.

And Lew will need to defend the Dodd-Frank Act, which overhauled financial regulation after the 2008 crisis. Since the law was passed in 2010, Wall Street has fought to weaken many of its stricter regulations.

He may also need to work on his signature, which starts off with a soft "J'' but is followed by seven loopy scribbles that render it illegible. The Treasury secretary's signature is emblazoned in the lower right corner of U.S. dollar bills of all denominations.

When he announced Lew's nomination, Obama said Lew had promised to work to make one letter legible "in order not to debase our currency."

Source: http://news.yahoo.com/lew-set-start-treasury-budget-cuts-loom-090252492.html

voting hours election results Doug Martin Barack Obama & Joe Biden Am I registered to vote Voter registration Election