上海419论坛,上海龙凤419,爱上海 – Powered by Teri Savorn!


Second ‘Fuck you Willetts’ banner used in protest

first_imgOn Saturday evening, a student hung up the banner in a doorway upon discovering that Willetts was in the college. Willetts was forced to take the banner down before being able to leave.The student told Cherwell, “It was something of an ‘emergency protest’ as no students knew he was going to be there. Willetts himself told me that £9k tuition fees are “progressive and productive”! He had to take the banner down to get through the doorway in the picture, and he got quite angry!”The reason as to why Willetts was present in the college is unclear, but it appears he was invited to a formal dinner along with several other eminent guests including Michael Portillo and a delegation from the Spanish government.However, Balliol students were not happy at having the Universities Minister in their college and decided to protest due to his unpopular decision to raise tuition fees to £9,000 per annum.The protesting student explained, “I think David Willetts is a despicable ideologue who, as Universities Minister, trebled tuition fees and is determined to marketise education, making it increasingly a privilege rather than a public good.“For me, it raises broader questions about who colleges (and the university) belong to – students and workers, or a bureaucratic elite. As far as I know, the JCR and MCR were not informed that this event was taking place and so had no opportunity to shun and condemn individuals like Willetts who are responsible for the decline and marketisation of education nationally.”A second student who was present at the protest said, “The whole thing was pretty funny, but also depressing. He tried to avoid walking through the banner but when he realised he couldn’t got angry. I don’t really appreciate an out of touch, angry old man telling me that I won’t actually have to pay my fees as long as I’m a ‘decent graduate’. At least I think that’s what he said.”She added, “Also I’m seriously confused by his definition of progressive. It might seem like it wasn’t worthwhile with so few of us there but he needs to know that he’s going to be held to account wherever he goes. Despite there being a larger crowd at the Union, this seemed to phase him far more. He wasn’t in a crowd of likeminded people.”Willetts has already been shown that he is not popular in the university. While participating in a debate on higher education earlier this term, protestors unfurled a ‘Fuck you Willetts’ banner from the balcony of the debating chamber. The two students responsible also shouted, “David Willetts, get out, we know what you’re all about” and “Cuts, job losses, money for the bosses”.The student who tied this banner over the doorway asked to remain anonymous due to the recent decision by Cambridge University to suspend a student for seven terms for a similar anti-Willetts protest. The Cambridge student in question read out a poetic protest to Willetts while the latter was giving a speech at the university.last_img read more

AG Curtis Hill Pledges Fetal Remains Will Receive Proper Dignity And Respect

first_imgAnnounces Phone Number And Email Address For Use By Anyone With Possible Connections To RemainsAttorney General Curtis Hill said Friday that his office will transport the remains of 2,246 fetuses back to Indiana after they were discovered earlier this month at the Illinois home of the late Dr. Ulrich Klopfer. A preliminary investigation indicates all the fetuses were aborted by Dr. Klopfer at Indiana clinics located in Fort Wayne, Gary and South Bend.“We are going to continue this matter to determine as best we can exactly what happened here,” Attorney General Hill said at a press conference. “But in the meantime, I can tell you that we are going to bring our babies home and make sure they are treated with the proper dignity and respect deserving of anyone.”Following Dr. Klopfer’s Sept. 3 death, Illinois authorities on Sept. 12 learned that family members going through his belongings found the preserved fetal remains stored at his residence. Since learning the fetuses are from Indiana, Illinois officials have turned over information and evidence to the Office of the Indiana Attorney General. The preliminary investigation has revealed that the fetuses were aborted from the years 2000 to 2002.Besides ensuring that the remains receive appropriate disposition under Indiana law, the Office of the Indiana Attorney General is also working to preserve and protect thousands of medical records found both at Dr. Klopfer’s Illinois residence and at his abandoned Indiana abortion clinics. On Thursday, the Office of the Indiana Attorney General executed search warrants at the Indiana locations and took possession of records left at those properties. No additional fetal remains were discovered in Indiana.“We have a concern about the abandoned records,” Attorney General Hill said. “Folks who use these clinics have a high degree of expectation of privacy and confidentiality. . . . It’s deplorable now that folks who went into this procedure, no matter how you feel about this procedure, have to relive that moment” with such uncertainty about the final disposition of the aborted fetus.Attorney General Hill expressed gratitude for the cooperation of multiple other offices and agencies, including Illinois Attorney General Kwame Raoul; the coroner’s office and law enforcement in Will County, Illinois; prosecutors in Allen, Lake and St. Joseph counties; the Hobart, Fort Wayne and South Bend police departments; and the Indiana State Police. In addition, he acknowledged Indiana legislators who have urged Attorney General Hill to investigate the matter.At the press conference, Attorney General Hill also announced that his office has set up a phone number and email address for the specific use of anyone with possible connections to the fetal remains who may wish to inquire. The email address is [email protected], and the phone number is (317) 234-6663.In 2016, the Indiana General Assembly passed a law requiring that medical facilities either bury or cremate fetal remains following abortions. This year, the U.S. Supreme Court upheld the law. The disturbing chain of events surrounding Dr. Klopfer’s actions demonstrates the need for state laws regulating the final disposition of fetal remains, Attorney General Hill said.FacebookTwitterCopy LinkEmailSharelast_img read more

McMahon Insurance Agency Celebrates New Office in Ocean City

first_imgWilliam McMahon Jr. cuts the ribbon during a ceremony Friday for the new Ocean City location of the family business McMahon Insurance Agency. By Maddy VitaleAn Ocean City couple stood in a room with over 100 people zipping around them talking, laughing and having a good time Friday.As they watched, the man, William McMahon Jr., looked at his wife, Sandy, and uttered one word: “Pride.”McMahon started the McMahon Insurance Agency in 1981, after purchasing what was then known as the Chattin-Halliday Agency. In 1991 he changed the name to McMahon Insurance.The Ocean City couple raised seven kids. As their family grew, so did the success of their business. And in the ’90s they turned over operations of the agency to William McMahon III, president of the agency, and his sister, Maura McMahon Primus. Three other siblings also work at the agency.On Friday, an open house and ribbon cutting was held at the McMahon Insurance Agency’s new location at 901 Simpson Ave., in a large building at the doorstep of the city’s Ninth Street corridor, the main entrance into town.“Pride, we have a lot of pride,” McMahon Jr. said.“We are thankful. Everything worked out. They listened to us,” Sandy McMahon remarked about how their children continue to successfully run the family business.Sandy and William McMahon Jr., of Ocean City, with four of their seven children at the open house for their new location of the family insurance business.William McMahon III, of Upper Township, knows what makes the business so successful.“We certainly all get along,” he said, adding that people don’t believe it until they see for themselves.He noted that he and the rest of the family are “thrilled to be on Ninth Street.”Anita McMahon, William’s wife, said the family has a knack for working with customers in the insurance business.“They take something really serious and make it fun. They have energy. They really take the time to work with someone when it may be stressful,” Anita said. “They treat everyone the way they would want to be treated.”The agency has 40 employees in total, including the Ocean City office and two other locations, an office at 222 South Shore Road in Marmora and at 1400 Texas Ave. Suite 1 in Cape May.“We have a lot of longtime employees. We also have sisters working for us,” McMahon Primus said. “We say this is the house that good service built. We truly work really hard.”Rev. Peter Joyce of St. Maximillian Kolbe Parish in Marmora gives the benediction for the McMahon Insurance Agency ribbon cutting ceremony Friday.During the ribbon cutting ceremony, the Rev. Peter Joyce of St. Maximillian Kolbe Parish in Marmora gave the benediction.Michele Gillian, executive director of the Ocean City Regional Chamber of Commerce, presided over the ceremony along with Ocean City Mayor Jay Gillian.“On behalf of the Ocean City Chamber and City of Ocean City, we welcome you in the rebuilding of Ninth Street and investing in Ocean City, America’s Greatest Family Resort,” Michele Gillian said.She pointed out that there can’t be enough good said about the McMahon family. Three generations of the family attended the ceremony. Two of the McMahons were Ocean City’s Citizen of the Year, another two McMahons were past presidents of the Ocean City Regional Chamber of Commerce.Gillian also said, “The McMahon Agency is a great family business that lives on in Ocean City.”Other dignitaries also included Ocean City Council President Pete Madden, Council Vice President Tony Wilson and Councilman Michael DeVlieger.The McMahon Insurance Agency serves the coastal area and is an independent agent representing all the top carriers to provide the best coverage, service and price, according to their website.The insurance company traces its roots back to 1922 when it was Haney Lloyd Chattin Real Estate & Insurance. In the 1960s, Albert Halliday purchased the firm and it became the Chattin-Halliday Agency. In 1981, William McMahon, Jr. bought the business and began operating with two employees and one office.The ribbon cutting ceremony and the opening of the new office represent the latest chapter in the company’s long history in Ocean City.For more information call 609-399-0060 or visit www.mcmahonagency.comThe new location of the McMahon Insurance Agency is at 901 Simpson Ave. in Ocean City.last_img read more

S Black takes a firm approach to fruit

first_imgWhile industrial processed fruit, such as strawberries, can be damaged by mechanical and thermal treatment, freezing or pasteurisation, with a negative effect on the fruit texture, S Black has introduced FirmFruit to combat this effect for manufacturers of sweet pies. Patented by DSM Food Specialities to improve fruit firmness and give clearly defined fruit pieces or whole fruits, the effect is achieved with fruit pectin demethylation in the fruit and fungal pectin methylesterase (PME) enzyme and calcium. This overcomes the negative effects of treatment during processing. The process can be applied to fresh, frozen or thawed fruit pieces, slices or purée.www.sblack.comlast_img read more

UPDATE: Proposed pay raise for South Bend Police officers tabled

first_img Previous articleUPDATE: Around 300 shots fired during weekend according to South Bend PoliceNext articleFour Winds Casinos to reopen on Monday, June 15 Jon ZimneyJon Zimney is the News and Programming Director for News/Talk 95.3 Michiana’s News Channel and host of the Fries With That podcast. Follow him on Twitter @jzimney. Twitter Facebook IndianaLocalNews Pinterest Google+ Google+ (Spencer Marsh/95.3 MNC) UPDATE: The South Bend Common Council voted to table the proposal to give raises to South Bend Police officers after the measure sparked protests on Monday, June 8. One demonstration took place in front of City Council President Tim Scott’s home. The other took place in front of the County-City building. The only councilman to push against tabling the raise proposal was councilman Jake Teshka. He says the officers deserve the raise.The following Common Council bills have been delayed:Bill No. 21-20- Amending Salary Ordinance No. 10682-19 has been proponed Indefinitely.Bill No. 12-20- Citizen’s Police Complaint Board Ordinance has been continued to the June 22, 2020 Common Council Meeting due to more Council discussion.ORIGINAL STORY: The South Bend chapter of Black Lives Matter is protesting ahead of the South Bend Common Council meeting on Monday, June 8, regarding the expected vote regarding a pay increase for South Bend Police.South Bend Common Council President Tim Scott and the South Bend Common Council are expected to consider the vote on approving a pay increase in police salaries.(Photo supplied/South Bend Black Lives Matter)The pay hike was proposed by South Bend Mayor James Mueller, in light of officers’ work in the midst of the pandemic.The group says the council’s willingness to consider directing money to the department that has a record of officer misconduct and controversy in the midst of the nationwide protests is out of touch.A protest took place in front of Council President Tim Scott’s home this morning. Another protest is happening this afternoon at the County-City Building. Pinterest UPDATE: Proposed pay raise for South Bend Police officers tabled Facebook WhatsApp Twitter WhatsApp By Jon Zimney – June 8, 2020 2 515 last_img read more

The sparring over trade

first_img The ‘understanding deficit’ between China, U.S. Economist Peter Navarro says policy shifts are bearing fruit At Harvard, Beijing’s ambassador downplays prospects of trade war The Daily Gazette Sign up for daily emails to get the latest Harvard news. A ringing defense of Trump on tradecenter_img Related GAZETTE: Trump prefers bilateral trade agreements over multilateral deals, perhaps because he’s more familiar with them and feels they are easier to sell to voters. President Obama put a lot of emphasis on multilateral deals. Broadly, what are the benefits and drawbacks of each?LAWRENCE: President Obama’s strategy with the Trans-Pacific Partnership was to sign an agreement with other Pacific countries that would not only bring us benefits but also increase our leverage to pressure China to change its behavior in order to get equal access to all their markets. But Trump thinks bilateral deals maximize U.S. leverage because we are bigger than each trading partner separately. But bilateral deals are less efficient and may have less scope for gains. The beauty of a multilateral deal is that if the conditions are the same with respect to all your trading partners, then you buy from the lowest-cost supplier. That’s an efficient way to do your trade. On the other hand, if you have different rules with respect to different trading partners, you could find yourself buying from less-efficient trading suppliers. I think bilaterals make the system more complex and divided and separated.In addition, it’s generally easier to get congressional approval for multilateral deals. When there’s a bilateral negotiation, people tend to focus a lot on the characteristics of the other country because it has a face. But when you do a deal with the World Trade Organization, that’s a whole group of countries, and so people tend not to focus on the nontrade aspects of their relationships with those countries. If you look at the votes in Congress, it’s been easier to pass multilateral deals than bilateral deals because it becomes about business rather than the characteristics of a particular country.GAZETTE: The rising populist movement in the U.S. and Europe has been driven, in part, by a view that the global economy has driven down wages or killed jobs for blue-collar and some white-collar workers.LAWRENCE: I think the global trading system has enabled literally billions of people who live in poor countries to emerge from poverty. It has been a major driver of higher living standards, especially in poor countries, so I don’t think we should lose sight of that. Yes, in the U.S. and Europe there are workers who’ve been adversely affected by trade with low-wage countries. In addition, there are certain cities and parts of the United States, in the Rust Belt and elsewhere, that have had adverse effects. Nonetheless, most of the studies suggest the gains outweigh the losses. In addition, the overwhelming reason for the wages and employment difficulties experienced by blue-collar workers has been the result of technological changes like automation, which appear to be far more powerful and, I might say, inevitable, than international trade.GAZETTE: Is it smart or realistic to adopt a kind of economic isolationism in 2019–2020?LAWRENCE: Firstly, a transition to becoming more self-sufficient is going to be very disruptive. A lot of workers and firms that are engaged in producing as part of the supply chains are going to be hurt. And, in the long run, even if the production is brought back to the United States, the technologies that are going to be used to produce the products that were offshored are going to be far more sophisticated and require far more skills than the technologies that were used earlier. So even if it’s successful, this reindustrialization process is not going to help those workers who were dislocated and displaced.GAZETTE: Given its track record, the U.S. may or may not follow through on tariff threats. Where do you think this goes from here?LAWRENCE: I think a huge amount of damage has already been done. If we were to get an agreement with China, but we still have President Trump in the White House, you can’t really depend on the United States following through with that agreement. One of the great ironies, and you’ve just seen it in the last two weeks with Mexico, is that we’ve come to an agreement over the new NAFTA, where we’ve agreed to have no trade barriers between our two countries. Yet at the very same time, the president has felt uninhibited about using tariffs, which violate that agreement, in order to pursue his concerns about immigration. So what do you get if you sign a trade agreement with the United States? That’s something all the other countries have to ask themselves. If the U.S. doesn’t adhere to the agreements, what’s the point? The president has destroyed America’s reputation as a reliable partner, and countries can no longer trust we will do what we say.GAZETTE: A new Goldman Sachs report says American voters disapprove of most of the trade actions against China, Mexico, Canada, and the E.U. Could these dust-ups simply end if Trump decides they hurt, not help, his reelection?LAWRENCE: That may be a possibility. But I will say, one of the few areas where Donald Trump has a deep conviction, and you can see it in his statements going back to the 1980s, is the idea that tariffs are good for the United States. One reason that he has been systematically underestimated by the Chinese and by the markets is that they believe that the only thing he’s going to be interested in is his popularity. But I think this is an area where he has deep convictions, and he has shown a willingness to impose tariffs whenever he can find a pretext. I believe his views are misguided, but I wouldn’t count on him changing his mind. You keep hearing him praising the benefits of tariffs. I think what will be very important is going to be how the Republicans respond to his tariff threats to Mexico, because if they vote to deny him the ability to impose them, what he would fear more than the polls is losing his clout within the Republican Party and his ability to impose tariffs at will. They ought to, but it remains to be seen if they will. This interview has been edited for length and clarity. President Trump has backed down for now from a threat to impose new tariffs on goods imported from Mexico, citing promises by that country to crack down on northward migration. But the issue of tariffs, whether against Mexico or numerous other nations, remains a key economic focal point of this administration.Far more than avocados and Modelo beer would see price hikes if the U.S. did eventually hike taxes on Mexico, one of its most important global trading partners. Everything from cars, phones, and laptops to  fresh fruit and vegetables would cost consumers more, analysts say, and the increased costs and lowered demand could put people out of work.Despite reaching agreement on a trade deal with Mexico and Canada in November, the still-unratified U.S.-Mexico-Canada Agreement, or “NAFTA 2.0” as some call it, President Trump recently pondered a 5 percent tariff that would have been added to goods and services coming in from Mexico barring an agreement to stem a rising flow of Central American migrants crossing into the U.S. The U.S. imported $371 billion from and exported $299 billion in goods and services to Mexico in 2018, according to the Office of the U.S. Trade Representative.Mexico is just the latest nation subjected to trade pressures, including possible tariffs. In 2018, the administration imposed new tariffs, ranging from 10 to 25 percent, on $200 billion worth of Chinese goods. On June 1, China retaliated with similar tariff levels on $60 billion worth of U.S. goods. Now, the U.S. may levy tariffs on $300 billion more in Chinese imports. Trump also has threatened to levy a 25 percent tax on autos imported from the European Union, has considered taxing imports from Australia, and has complained for decades about a U.S. trade imbalance with Japan, though a new deal may be announced next month. Analysts warn that any sustained disputes could destabilize the global economy and prompt an economic downturn in the U.S., and may, with China, present serious national security risks as well.The Gazette spoke last week with Robert Z. Lawrence, Albert L. Williams Professor of International Trade and Investment at Harvard Kennedy School’s Mossavar-Rahmani Center for Business and Government, about the myriad trade disputes and the potential consequences for companies, workers, and the economy.Q&ARobert Z. LawrenceGAZETTE:  How would you characterize the current state of U.S. trade relations? Is this an unnecessarily chaotic time of volatility, as some critics say, or a temporary period of disruption and change that could finally force obstinate trading partners like China to the table?LAWRENCE: I think we’re at a potentially watershed point. For 70 years, the United States succeeded in gradually convincing our trading partners that they should adhere to a rules-based trading system, and what we’re now seeing, as a result of the trade policies of the Trump administration, is an undermining of that system, where its greatest protagonist, the United States, is now its greatest threat.GAZETTE: In what way?LAWRENCE: We led the world in a series of trade negotiations that established agreements, both multilaterally and with particular trading partners like Mexico and Canada, in which countries agreed to adhere to a certain set of rules. A key element in those rules was that the countries would not exceed certain levels of tariffs. And compliance with the rules was actually quite remarkable. But what’s been happening recently is the Trump administration has been undermining the system and breaking those rules. For example, the most basic principles of the World Trade Organization are that countries agree not to exceed certain limits for their tariff levels, and provide all members with equal treatment. When the United States unilaterally imposes tariffs on China at the levels that we have imposed, we violate both those principles.GAZETTE:  What are some of the most significant consequences that could result from these trade disputes?LAWRENCE:  What we saw over the past 30 years was a complete change in the way products are produced internationally. It used to be that a product would be made in one country and sold in another. Today, they’re produced [across] the world in global supply chains. Take your Apple iPhone: What you’ll discover is that it’s assembled in China, but it contains components from all over the world. But as a result of what’s been happening now, companies that operate global supply chains have been subject to a huge amount of disruption and uncertainty. They can’t be sure, if they plan to assemble in China or in Mexico, that those supply chains won’t be interrupted. It used to be that when you were planning these supply chains, you could at least be sure of the terms of your market access. No longer. So a second watershed is that the international investment responses of companies all around the world are going to be different.GAZETTE: How are firms likely to respond?LAWRENCE: It’s going to be a combination. In the short run, they don’t have a lot of flexibility, so what we’ve seen is that importers have been forced to pass on the Trump tariffs to American consumers. If the tariffs remain in place, however, they will try to produce in countries that aren’t subject to the tariffs. Quite a few firms thought they could move to Mexico as a safe haven in order to escape from the frictions of China. Now they’re learning Mexico isn’t immune either. … That will mean that the U.S. and other countries will lose the substantial gains to our living standards that have come from being able to produce goods and services in the most efficient locations.GAZETTE:  Could it trigger a U.S. or even a global recession?LAWRENCE:  Certainly, the effects are now building up to the magnitudes that are significant in terms of GDP [gross domestic product]. Now, the answer to that question will depend on whether the authorities, both in China and the United States and elsewhere, will be able to counteract the negative effects of these shocks with expansionary policies. For example, the Federal Reserve the other day announced that it would adopt a lower interest rate than it was planning. And in China the government is also planning new fiscal policies in order to try to offset some of the negative effects. It’s hard to predict, but certainly this is a shock for the global economy and will slow it down. “So what do you get if you sign a trade agreement with the United States? That’s something all the other countries have to ask themselves. If the U.S. doesn’t adhere to the agreements, what’s the point?”last_img read more

Horse Auction.

first_imgProceeds Help in Many Ways For the past five years those words have rung out from the Junior National Livestock Expo, earning the University of Georgia 4-H program more than $60,000. This year, the sixth annual Georgia 4-H Horse Benefit Auction will be in Perry Feb. 26 at the Georgia National Fairgrounds. The money from the auction goes into the Georgia 4-H horse program. The proceeds will: “Throughout the year we solicit donations of horses for the February auction,” Johnson said. “We also have a silent auction for tack and horse-related equipment and clothing.” This year’s auction will feature at least 13 horses.center_img Help offset participants’ costs in the annual horse school. Keep prices down for the annual horse show. Fund the national 4-H horse quiz bowl trip for Georgia’s state winning team. Help UGA equine research efforts. “The auction was the brainchild of the Georgia Farm Bureau Equine Commodity Committee and specialists with the UGA College of Agricultural and Environmental Sciences,” said Laura Perry Johnson, Georgia 4-H livestock specialist. “Going once, going twice, SOLD to benefit the Georgia 4-H Horse program.”last_img read more

Peanut Planting

first_imgUniversity of Georgia Cooperative Extension peanut agronomist Scott Monfort insists that poor peanut plant stands in Georgia may not necessarily be due to seed quality.Environmental conditions play a role, especially on peanuts planted in early to mid-April. Monfort said any soils under 68 degrees can cause problems for the seed, likely a delay in growth, which can lead to a lack of uniform plant stands in the field.“If you plant something in the ground and the soil temperature is less than 68 degrees, it’s going to take more than two weeks to come up instead of the normal five days. With good, warm soils, 70-degree soils with good moisture, peanut plants will typically pop up in five days,” he said. Growers tend to blame bad seed, he said, but even good seed won’t sprout in bad conditions. Poor plant stands are problems early in the season, either in late April or early May, when environmental conditions may be cool, excessively wet and generally not ideal. Not always the culprit, poor seed quality can be addressed before planting. Monfort encourages farmers to check their seeds and make sure they are “nice, uniform-looking seed,” not shriveled or riddled with black spots and insect damage.“Compare it (peanut seed) to a pack of roasted peanuts. Open it up and put it in your hand. If you want to eat it, it probably is good enough to plant,” he said. “It’s the same seed, one just has a seed treatment on it. The other has been processed for eating, but it’s the same quality. If you look at it and say, ‘Good night! I wouldn’t want to eat that,’ then in all reality, it’s probably not that great of a seed.”Once growers receive their seed for the upcoming year, Monfort is adamant that the seed should not be left out in the sun. Leaving peanut seed uncovered during the heat of the day, or otherwise unfavorable conditions, can slowly drop the germination level over time.If growers have an issue after planting and believe replanting is the answer, Monfort recommends calling the local UGA Extension agent first for a second opinion.“They’ll help diagnose problems and determine whether the farmer does need to replant, or if they have enough plants to suffice for a decent yield. Some people think they’ve automatically got to replant, but they don’t always have to. Peanuts tend to compensate quite a bit,” Monfort said.Peanut planting in Georgia typically starts in the latter part of April or early May. Growers should wait for the soil temperature to reach 68 degrees or higher for three straight days before beginning planting.To monitor soil temperature across the state, see the UGA College of Agricultural and Environmental Sciences’ Georgia Automated Environmental Monitoring Network at weather.uga.edu.last_img read more

The charity route into credit unions is still open

first_img ShareShareSharePrintMailGooglePinterestDiggRedditStumbleuponDeliciousBufferTumblr by: Peter RudegeairSome credit unions that used an aggressive tactic to try to expand their membership rolls were dealt a blow last week: The National Credit Union Administration said the federally chartered credit unions it oversees can’t set up charities and other associations for the sole reason of qualifying virtually anyone to join the credit unions.Why couldn’t the credit unions simply do business with whomever they wanted in the first place? It’s because by law these nonprofit financial institutions serve only members, who are linked by one or more “common bonds.” As nonprofits, credit unions enjoy tax advantages that can enable them to pay higher rates on deposits and charge lower rates on loans than many banks.The NCUA action doesn’t mean, however, that credit unions can’t list membership in a charity or organization—including ones that are open to anyone—as one of the qualifications for membership. A number of very large credit unions do exactly that:Pentagon Federal Credit Union: Applicants who aren’t members of the U.S. military and don’t qualify on other grounds can join PenFed by joining and paying around $15 in nonrefundable membership dues to either Voices for America’s Troops, a nonprofit subsidiary of the Military Officers Association of America, or the National Military Family Association. continue reading »last_img read more

HFSC overwhelmingly passes CUNA-backed data security, NCUA budget bills

first_img 2SHARESShareShareSharePrintMailGooglePinterestDiggRedditStumbleuponDeliciousBufferTumblr Votes from the House Financial Services Committee Wednesday will help make consumer data safer, said CUNA President/CEO Jim Nussle. The committee passed two bills that have strong CUNA support, the Data Security Act of 2015 (H.R. 2205) and the National Credit Union Administration Budget Transparency Act (H.R. 2287) during its markup.H.R. 2205 passed the committee with a 46-9 vote and H.R. 2287 passed with a 40-16 vote.“The House Financial Services Committee voted today to protect consumers by strengthening our country’s data security laws. The CUNA-backed Data Security Act will prevent breaches by providing a higher standard for all who accept payments, better notification procedures and a federal law that will replace the cumbersome patchwork of state laws,” said CUNA President/CEO Jim Nussle. “We thank the members of the committee who voted in favor of protecting the American consumer, and urge House leadership to quickly bring the legislation to the House floor.“Until retailers adhere to the same standards that financial institutions are beholden to, millions of consumers will remain at risk,” Nussle added. continue reading »last_img read more