text:
China's great rebalancing act has begun. But how successful and orderly the rebalancing process will be will depend on how realistic the government are in their growth projections. What is clear is that China can no longer accommodate 7-8 percent annual growth if it truly hopes to cure its severe domestic imbalances.
As analysts and official entities like the World Bank continue to downgrade their forecasts for medium-term growth in China, I have been asked increasingly often for the reasons I believe that 3-4 percent average annual growth rates is likely to be the upper limit for China during the adjustment period. In this blog entry I want to explain how I arrived at my numbers. The analysis is fairly straightforward and those looking for a very complex econometric model are likely to be disappointed, but I have always believed that, unlike physics or cooking, anything in economics that cannot be easily explained to an educated layman with 9th-grade algebra and a little bit of calculus is likely to be useless (and if he knows some probability theory, the most beautiful branch of math in my opinion, he is able to soar).
Before beginning I should make two points. First, for many years I assumed that the "adjustment" period would begin shortly after the beginning of the administration of President Xi Jinping and Premier Li Keqiang, that is, from 2013 or 2014, and would run through the presumed end of their term in 2023.
In fact I may have been overly pessimistic. It now seems to me that China actually began adjusting economically, although in a very limited way, in 2012, when we first started to see growth slow as Beijing became increasingly worried about the astonishing increase in debt. This probably occurred because the big wage increases in 2010-11, which were counterbalanced by the sharp drop in real interest rates during that period, were finally able to take effect in 2012 when real interest rates rose sharply once again. Of course whether the adjustment begins in 2012, 2013, or 2014 probably doesn't matter much to the analysis, but it is good news, I think, that it may have started earlier than I originally expected.
There is, by the way, nothing especially important about ten years except that it is a round number. If China adjusts much more aggressively than I expect, the adjustment period could easily occur within less than ten years, although this is unlikely to be the case because it will be politically difficult to pull off.
On the other hand, if the adjustment period is much longer than ten years, perhaps because the relationship between investment growth and consumption growth is highly positive, or because political opposition is fiercer than expected, growth rates might be a little higher on average in the first few years but the period of stagnant growth would last longer than ten years and there would be a much higher risk of an economic collapse.
As for the second point, I don't really think of my numbers as being growth predictions. In fact more generally I do not like to make predictions and frankly have no idea of how to go about doing so, especially if it is likely to involve the complex econometric models.
What I prefer to do, and find more useful at least for my way of thinking, is to try develop an understanding of the overall system under clearly specified (I hope) assumptions, and then work through the logic of the system to see what the various outcomes can be. In other words I am not trying to predict what will happen but simply to list the various scenarios that are consistent with the model and to state explicitly what are the assumptions needed for those scenarios to occur. If the assumptions are plausible, then so is the scenario. If not, then they are not.
As I see it, 3-4 percent is what it takes for my arithmetic to work within plausible scenarios. It is, in other words, the upper limit of the average growth rate that allows me to work out arithmetically the growth in debt, consumption, investment and GDP needed for the amount of economic adjustment that will rebalance the economy by the minimal acceptable amount, without making some fairly implausible assumptions.
This means that depending on how aggressive Beijing is during the reform process, China's actual growth might be higher if Beijing engineers a much more aggressive program than I think plausible of transferring resources from the state sector to the household sector, thereby forcing up the household income and household consumption shares of GDP. It will be lower if there are more adverse shocks to trade or the financial sector, or if political opposition to the reforms is fiercer than expected. In other words I really think of 3-4 percent average annual growth as the plausible upper limit of GDP growth, assuming no massive privatization program.
Let me state my assumptions. As everyone now recognizes, rebalancing in China requires that consumption grow significantly as a share of GDP over the next decade or more. China currently reports household consumption as representing about 35 percent of GDP, which is an almost surreally low number. By how much would consumption have to rise for meaningful rebalancing to have occurred?
Before answering, how meaningful is this 35 percent number? A number of analysts have regularly argued that the official data seriously understates both income and consumption in China, and so China's real household consumption is much higher. This may well be true, but I think there are at least three counterarguments. First, while it is true that some consumption is not included in the official data, at the same time there is quite a lot in there that should not count as consumption, or at least not for the purposes of understanding the rebalancing process.
For example three of the fastest growing consumption categories year after year are gold and jewelry, household furnishings, and household appliances. I would argue that all of these should really count as investment, and certainly the latter two will drop dramatically as investment, especially in real estate, drops (and the former will probably drop as the financial repression tax is eliminated). As a rule any item of consumption the demand for which is highly correlated to investment should be treated as investment for our purposes, not consumption. So when analysts point out that a lot of consumption is paid for by businesses on behalf of employees, and so does not show up as consumption in the data, they are right. But they are also largely irrelevant. The consumption that we care about is consumption unrelated to investment, because it is this consumption that must rise as investment drops.
Second, if both consumption and income are understated, as they may well be, this does not necessarily mean that the consumption share of GDP is more than 35 percent. This would only be the case if the ratio of hidden consumption to hidden income is greater than 35 percent.
If most of the hidden consumption and income belong to the rich or very rich, as is commonly assumed, it may well be that the true ratio is lower, not higher, than 35 percent. Many analysts are muddled about the differences between absolute consumption levels and the consumption ratio, and so they believe that if they can show that consumption is higher than claimed by the National Bureau of Statistics, the imbalance is less of a problem. It isn't. What matters is the consumption share of all that is produced, and if both GDP and total consumption are higher than the official numbers, China's imbalance is not necessarily better. It may even be worse, and it is the imbalance that matters to China's growth prospects.
Finally we are not talking about small imbalances here. The reported consumption share of GDP is astonishingly low, perhaps the lowest ever recorded, and so the error in the data would have to be enormous for it to matter to the rebalancing debate. Even if it turns out that 20 percent of Chinese consumption, and none of its income, were hidden and unrecorded in the NBS data, China would still easily have the lowest consumption rate of any major economy in the world.
What Is The Right Level Of Consumption And Investment?
Globally, consumption represents a fairly stable 65 percent of GDP. Over the past decade this average has encompassed a group of high-consuming countries, such as the United States and peripheral Europe, whose average consumption exceeded 70 percent of GDP, as well as a group of low-consuming countries, mainly in Asia, whose average consumption, excluding China, ranged from 50 percent to 58 percent of GDP.
This distribution of over- and under-consumption should change in the next few years. It is unlikely that the high-consuming countries will be able to maintain their excess levels of consumption for the rest of this decade, and indeed their consumption rates have already come down substantially, with more probably to come. Peripheral Europe is in crisis, and the United States is taking steps to raise its savings rate so as to reduce its current account deficit. Japan, although already a relatively low-consuming country, is also likely to try to increase its savings rate so that its massive debt can be funded by patient domestic savers, rather than by impatient foreigners.
This means that the rest of the low-consuming countries are also unlikely to be able to keep their consumption levels as low as they have in the past. A world with low-consuming countries requires high-consuming countries in order to balance.
If global consumption drops in the high consuming countries, with no corresponding rise in the low-consuming countries, it is unlikely that investment will rise quickly enough to replace it (why invest if no one is going to buy the output?), and so the global economy must respond with enough of a contraction in GDP to maintain consumption at roughly 65 percent. The great consumption and savings imbalances of the past that led to the current crisis, in other words, have to adjust. This means that if there are no longer large economies consuming 70 percent of more of their national income, the world is unlikely to be able easily to accommodate large economies consuming just 50–58 percent of their national incomes.
Let us assume, nonetheless, that the world can accommodate a minimal amount of Chinese rebalancing. Within a decade Chinese household consumption, according to this assumption, will rise to no more than 50 percent of GDP, as difficult as it will be for the world to accept such low consumption from its second-largest economy. This will mean that China still produces far more than it absorbs – especially if investment growth were to come down sharply, and it would mean that the rest of the world would be forced to absorb excess Chinese production without resorting to trade intervention.
For the sake of completion let us make a second assumption that, because the world is unable to accommodate such a low consumption level for the world's second largest economy, global pressure forces an even more dramatic change in Chinese household consumption so that it rises to 55 percent of GDP, instead of 50 percent as in our first assumption, in ten years. Both of these assumptions can be modeled in a way that combines consumption and GDP growth to arrive at the desired outcomes, and I will ignore the possibility that if the world forces China to raise its consumption rate to 55 percent in ten years, this will probably happen through negative growth and trade disputes, thus making all my numbers overly optimistic.
So much for our assumptions about the consumption rate – the second set of assumptions involves investment. Currently China has the highest investment share of GDP in the world, with investment comprising 46 percent of GDP or more, depending on how it is calculated. A 2012 IMF paper that I have cited in earlier issues of this newsletter shows investment as high as 49 percent of GDP, and it calculates excess investment, i.e. the spread between actual investment levels and the level predicted by an historical model, which began growing around the year 2000, as being 5-10 percentage points.
What is the appropriate level for a country like China? A number of studies have examined other high-investment developing countries during their growth miracle stages, and for most of these countries investment peaked out briefly at 35-40 percent of GDP (in Malaysia, Thailand and Singapore investment did at one point exceed 40 percent, but in each case only for a very brief period). In emerging markets investment is typically around 30 percent of GDP.
How should China compare to these countries? Some analysts argue that China, a very poor country, suffers from a capital stock that is too low, and so the optimal investment level should be much higher. This reasoning, I hope I was able to show in my June blog entry, is based on a fallacy. The optimal amount of investment for any country depends not on how far it is from the capital frontier but rather on its level of social capital, and this implies that very poor countries should optimally have lower levels of capital stock per capita than richer countries.
China's capital stock per capita, for example, is higher than that of Mexico, and much higher than that of Russia and Brazil, three other large developing countries that are substantially richer than China and whose workers are more productive. When analysts say that China's capital stock is relatively low, they are completely befuddled. It is low compared to the richest and most productive countries in the world, as it should be, but it is high compared to other developing countries, and even compared to developing countries with much higher levels of productivity
Because investment shares in other developing countries peaked out at 35-40 percent, some analysts argue that this is the appropriate level of investment for China. There are of course a number of problems with this argument but two stand out especially. First, the countries for which investment peaked out at 35-40 percent of GDP nearly all had subsequent periods of very difficult adjustment, with burgeoning growth in debt and either sharp economic contraction or many years of very slow growth, during which periods the investment share of GDP dropped substantially.
It is not at all clear, in other words, that for these countries 35-40 percent was the optimal investment share of GDP. This was probably already too much investment because in many if not most cases it was subsequently followed by many years of low or even negative growth, probably as the economy was forced to grind its way through the debt associated with the excess investment. The optimal level, in other words, was probably much closer to 30 percent.
]Second, even if 35-40 percent was somehow the optimal level for China all along, investment in China has substantially exceeded this level for many years, so it seems obvious that an appropriate adjustment should mean not that investment drops from 46 percent of GDP to 35-40 percent, but rather that is drops to something well below 35 percent for many years before returning to the "optimal" level. This, I think, is just common sense.
Making the implicit explicit
So I assume that investment must drop as a share of GDP. One way or another, either because Beijing forces changes in the growth model, or because Beijing does nothing and allows debt to build to the point where debt capacity constraints are breached, after which investment collapses automatically and the investment share of GDP will drop substantially.
How long will it take? I am going to assume Beijing has ten years to bring investment levels down to the new "optimal" level just to make my calculations easier, but as in the case of taking ten years for consumption to adjust, I think this is an heroic and frankly implausible assumption. Debt levels are simply too high in China for it to continue this level of investment growth for so many more years.
To repeat the exercise, then, let me make two separate assumptions – that investment will drop to 40 percent of GDP in ten years and that investment will drop to 35 percent of GDP in ten years. In either case I will assume that investment is currently 46 percent of GDP, although it is probably closer to 49 percent.
It turns out that it is fairly simple arithmetic to work out the implications of each of these assumptions relative to GDP growth. Rather than start with growth assumptions in consumption and investment and use these to determine what the corresponding GDP growth rate is likely to be, I thought it would be more useful if I reverse the process and simply assume a bunch of GDP growth rates ranging from -2 percent to +10 percent. These are the different average GDP growth rates possible under different scenarios for the next ten years.
We will assume two sets of adjustments for investment and consumption. The "easier" adjustment scenarios have household consumption growing from 35 percent of GDP to 50 percent of GDP, while investment declines from 46 percent of GDP to 40 percent of GDP. The "tougher" adjustment scenarios have household consumption growing from 35 percent of GDP to 55 percent of GDP, while investment declines from 46 percent of GDP to 35 percent of GDP.
The table below lists the consumption and investment growth rates needed for rebalancing to take place at each of the highlighted GDP growth rates.
To read the table, let us start by assuming, as an example, that we believe the average GDP growth rate over the ten-year period will be 6 percent. For China to do a minimal amount of rebalancing that gets consumption to 50 percent of GDP and investment to 40 percent of GDP, we can quickly figure out what the corresponding growth rates of consumption and investment must be. Consumption must grow by 9.9 percent a year and investment must grow by 4.5 percent a year to get us there.
Notice the reason why I do it this way rather than the "normal" way most other economists would. Instead of estimating what I expect the growth rates in consumption and investment will be, and then calculating the implicit GDP growth rate from those numbers, I start with an assumed GDP growth rate and then calculate what the implicit growth rates in consumption and investment must be in order for rebalancing to take place. I am not making predictions, in other words. I am simply working out logically what any GDP growth rate must imply in terms of consumption and investment growth rates in order for China to rebalance.
This allows me to make statements like this: If you think that China's GDP will grow by 7 percent a year over the next decade, and if you expect a minimal amount of rebalancing, then you are implicitly predicting that consumption will grow by 10-11 percent a year for ten years and that investment will grow by 4-5.5 percent. If you believe these two implicit predictions are plausible, then your 7 percent prediction is also plausible.
Trade Is A Residual
Notice of course that for the changes to work we are implicitly assuming that the GDP share of the sum of other consumption (government and business) and the current account surplus changes automatically to allow the equation to work. So if consumption rises from 35 percent of GDP to 50 percent of GDP, for example, while investment falls from 46 percent of GDP to 40 percent of GDP, the other sources of demand (mainly other consumption and the current account) must have reduced their share of GDP from 19 percent to 10 percent. This probably means a sharp contraction in the country's current account surplus and perhaps even a current account deficit.
I want to state again that these numbers are not predictions. They are simply the arithmetically necessary growth rates that are consistent with our assumptions. To return to the interpretation of the table, let us assume again that China does the minimal amount of rebalancing so that in ten years household consumption is 50 percent of GDP and investment is 40 percent of GDP, what are the investment and consumption growth rates consistent with, say, 6 percent GDP growth, and are they plausible?
It turns out that average GDP growth rates of 6 percent require, as an arithmetical necessity, that household consumption grow by 9.9 percent a year over the next ten years and that investment grow by 4.5 percent, after many years of high double digit growth and more recently growth in the low double digits. Is this plausible?
I would argue that positive investment growth rates for another ten years are highly likely to result in our reaching debt capacity constraints well before the end of the decade, so I am skeptical about the investment implications of this scenario. By the way some analysts have mischievously pointed to the very poor construction quality in China to argue that investment growth rates have to stay high just in order to account for higher-than-estimated depreciation costs, and that this suggests that China can grow faster than what we might otherwise assume.
This of course is nonsense. The fact that buildings and infrastructure are poorly constructed means that China is worse off, not better off, and the investment projects will ultimately be required to generate sufficient returns to pay off even more debt than originally estimated. Because it is debt capacity constraints that constrain investment, anything that creates debt without creating additional productivity to service the debt cannot possibly be a solution. Higher-than-expected depreciation increases debt relative to debt-servicing capacity.
I would also argue, more importantly, that if annual investment growth drops to 4.5 percent, and GDP growth to 6 percent, it will be very difficult, without significant and politically painful transfers from the state sector to the household sector, for consumption to grow at anywhere close to 9.9 percent a year for ten years. Consumption growth is, after all, positively correlated with investment growth, especially in the internal provinces upon which a lot of useless investment has been lavished.
In order to get Chinese households to increase their consumption by nearly 10 percent every year, I would argue that household income would have to grow at that rate, which means that wages, interest rates, and the value of the renminbi should in the aggregate increase rapidly to get consumption to rise fast enough, and of course since it is precisely low wage growth, low interest rates, and an undervalued currency that goose GDP growth, reversing them is not consistent with high GDP growth.
Can consumption grow at close to 10 percent for ten years while household income grows much more slowly? Yes, of course it can, if the household savings rate declines, but as China's economy slows and as concerns about debt rise, it seems to me a tad optimistic to assume that the household savings rate will decline sharply. Rising income and rising uncertainty both suggest that we should expect higher, not lower, household savings rates, which in turn imply that household income must grow faster, not slower, than household consumption.
All of this suggest to me that while 6 percent GDP growth for the next ten years might not be impossible, it is extremely unlikely because it requires what are to me implausible assumptions about the ability to maintain and increase already-high levels of investment without increasing the debt burden unsustainably and about the rise in the growth rate of household income as both GDP and investment growth drop sharply. This is why even 6 percent annual GDP growth rates, which are still lower than most current growth projections for China, are implausibly high, in my opinion.
What about if you believe that reducing investment is a much more urgent priority than raising consumption? In that case you might argue that China can grow at 6 percent while the household consumption share of GDP rises to 50 percent and the investment share of GDP declines to 35 percent.
In that case you are implicitly assuming that household consumption will grow on average by 9.9 percent a year for ten years while investment grows by 3.1 percent a year. Is this possible? Of course it is. Is it plausible? Again, only if you believe that investment growth can drop sharply while the growth in household consumption rises to nearly 10 percent a year for ten years.
So what is plausible? My working assumption, which I acknowledge is probably still optimistic, is that somehow or the other Beijing can keep household consumption growing at around 7-8 percent a year, even with a sharp decline in the investment growth rate and with the pressing need to clean up the banking system (and remember that traditionally, in China and elsewhere, cleaning up the banking system always means finding ways of getting the household sector to pay for the losses).
I know many consider assumption this to be a little optimistic, but if Beijing is worried about the social implications of adjustment, this is probably the target it will need to meet, and Beijing can do so even with much slower GDP growth if the leadership implements mechanisms that transfer wealth from the state sector to the household sector. I discuss why this is the right growth rate for to target in more detail in a recent piece published on the Carnegie Endowment website and in an OpEd piece in the Financial Times.
The table above shows that if China is to do the minimal amount of rebalancing, which requires that the world accommodate for another ten years large Chinese trade surpluses, and that debt can continue to grow – quickly but at a lower rate than in the past – for another ten years without pushing China up against its debt capacity constraints, 7-8 percent growth in household consumption is consistent with roughly 3-4 percent growth in GDP. It is also consistent with more or less no growth in investment, which would after ten years bring the investment level down to 35 percent of GDP.
These numbers are, I think, plausible if still a little optimistic. This is something, in other words, that I think Beijing can reasonably pull off – if it is able to manage political opposition from the domestic elite – because they can transfer resources from the state sector to the household sector at a pace necessary to keep the growth rate of household income and household consumption fairly high. However GDP growth rates significantly above 3-4 percent, I would argue, require assumptions that are unlikely to be met unless Beijing is able radically to transform its attitude to state ownership and the power of the elite, and so embark on a major transfer of assets from the state to the household sector.
This is why I have argued since 2009 that that 3-4 percent average GDP growth for a decade is likely to be the upper limit once Beijing seriously begins to rebalance the Chinese economy, and if the administration of President Xi and Premier Li is able to pull this off, it would be a huge accomplishment. China would rebalance substantially, the problem of debt would have been managed relatively well, and the income of average Chinese households will have nearly doubled over the decade. The key assumption, of course, is that in the face of a sharp drop in investment, Beijing is nonetheless able to maintain current high levels of consumption growth.
Related: How China Can Address Its Economic Challenges By 2030: Justin Yifu Lin
Related: Fixing China's Economic Imbalances: Michael Pettis
Related: New Leadership, New China?: Dan Steinbock
Before closing it is worth pointing out that many analysts have told me that they do not think it is possible for household income growth to exceed GDP growth for many years. But why not? After all state income growth exceeded household income growth for many years, and if Beijing reverses the mechanism that accomplished this – albeit with political difficulty – it can reverse the relative growth rates. More importantly, Japan did just this after 1990, when GDP grew by around 0.5 percent annually but household income and household consumption grew by between 1 percent and 2 percent. The US did this too in the early 1930s when, if I remember correctly, household income and household consumption dropped by a lot less than GDP (around 35 percent) and investment (around 90 percent).
But notice these two examples. One occurred under conditions of no growth and the other under conditions of negative growth. Severely unbalanced systems always rebalance in the end, but the process of rebalancing is rarely easy.
By Michael Pettis
Michael Pettis is a senior associate at the Carnegie Asia Programme and professor of finance with Peking University's Guanghua School of Management. Pettis previously taught at Tsinghua University and Columbia University, and worked on Wall Street in trading, capital markets and corporate finance.
Rebalancing and long term growth is republished with permission from China Financial Markets.
Get more special features in your inbox: Subscribe to our newsletter for alerts and daily updates.
Do you have a strong opinion on this article or on the economy? We want to hear from you! Tell us what you think by commenting below, or contribute your own op-ed piece at [email protected]


text:
Leave A Reply Cancel reply
188 thoughts on "RROD."
June 17, 2014 at 8:28 am
Hi are using WordPress for your site platform? I'm new to the blog world but I'm trying to get started and set up my own. Do you need any coding knowledge to make your own blog? Any help would be really appreciated!
April 25, 2012 at 2:40 pm
I would not even send it to be repaired. i would open it up. Screw the warranty. Stupid microsoft pLaced a shared heating sink like radiator with a single fan to cool down 2 chips! That's right Joe. The Cpu and The GPU are both weilded on the same Board and the distance between each is pretty close. Generaly you have the northbridge closeby not the goddamn GPU.
It's as if Microsoft made the deseing on purpose for it to break. All you have to do is go get some thermal paste and remove the heatsink "delicatly" it has a X shape radiator. Notice the cpu and gpu are like flat squares that shines on the board.
On the heatsink side you will notice that the same cooper plate being in contact with both cpu and gpu! Not really efficient if you ask me.
I would cut the first plate right in the middle and place a isolator material between the first plate. So that the heat dissapation from the cpu and GPu are SEPAREATED!! What you don't whant is the Gpu sharing it's heat signature with the CPU.
Check thermal specification of cooper. Then note that the gpu reach a temp of 40 Celcius on IDLE!!! Can reach 70 celcius on use.
On the cpu case however its a mere 25 celcius idle and 50 on load.
Calculating the Heat specs. of cooper adding it with the temperature of the GPU and the CPU you get a a whooping idle temperature of 43,6 celcius. —(Yep, your cpu is gona get that heat)
Just guest the on load temperature. then just imagnie the heavy load over extended time.
Remember that on all computer compnents. Excessiding 70 celcius is considered dengerous. without proper ventilation. (good ventilation is a positive pressure. —-(+ pressure is when you have more air that gets in then leave) (- pressure is the oposite and cause trendmanous ammount of heat litteraly transforming a computer case into a toaster)
Worst enemy of computer hardware = Over voltage and high heat. Place your xbox 360 on a ziploc "tm". remove the air and place it on the freezeer for at least 48 hours.Do not remove any components before. Not even the HDD. Well removing any gaming Discs. D'uh.
Removing the air is premordial because you do not whant to have condensation transforming into ice crystal inside your xbox 360!
hope this helps.
June 28, 2011 at 12:08 pm
break that pice of shit, thats why i have ps3
November 25, 2011 at 1:04 pm
Me too, and I've never regretted my choice.
This may be a silly question, depending on the answer, but; Is it true that Xbox 360s were deliberately built poorly so that they would be sent in for repair more often? Its a rumour that been going around for years, but I've never been sure if it is true or not. I always hoped that a large company would never be THAT greedy, but you never know…
April 8, 2011 at 6:34 am
this is why im a pc gamer
July 19, 2011 at 9:50 pm
Even though you OBVIOUSLY have a console only game as avatar pic?
April 6, 2011 at 5:28 am
You Should get a PS3 its much more reliable and has many more awesome game exclusives
consider it
March 11, 2011 at 2:34 am
Ok so Costco gave me a life time warranty on my X box 360. This is a real warranty. What does that mean? It is a cash in hand deal which means when my X box 360 breaks I take it back and they give me back the full amount is cash that it cost. And then I go and pick out a new one. It is usually at least 10 bucks cheaper so I get paid for my time having to bring it back. I have gone through 4 of four of the of them and I have only gotten my money paid back to me. So who is to blame for this bad product? All of you who bought your X box from other stores. Why? Why? Why? Did you not read about this problem? Do you do no product research? You are the problem. They will keep on making these systems if you keep buying them from places that don't provide life time warranties. Stop giving these other game stores business. Do some actual research!!!!!! Yes I know you want to play your games and researching hurts but you are the problem and you make it worse by rewarding companies with money.
November 29, 2010 at 5:46 pm
XD nice shop, it made me chuckle. i am also sorry for your loss *pats on shoulder*
November 14, 2010 at 3:13 am
This is a message for the webmaster/admin here at angryjoeshow.com.
May I use some of the information from this blog post right above if I give a link back to your website?
September 30, 2010 at 3:40 pm
I had this happen to me for the 2nd time about a month ago!! the first time xbox replaced it or not replaced but fixed and even put in a new disc drive which i didnt even know was faulty. Anyways they were really good about it and sorted it out. Considering i had it 2yrs prior i wasnt to bothered about it. But then…………………… Nooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo…………………… Again….. not again……. so i phoned them and like you joe the waranty was not valid now! you piece of #'#'[[pko microsoft im half way through red dead redemption and final fantasy grrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrr
Anyways im skint and havnt been playing on it as dont wanny splash out on a new console till i decide which one but unfortunately just 5 min before the ring of death appeared microsoft live put on an offer for a yrs subscription for £32 which i pressed and then after that it broke just as the new xbox slim was due out that day. Good excuse to buy a new one or maybe…. A CONSPIRICY MWA HA HA. Seems a bit of a coincedance microsoft. Well im still with out either console and decided to look on my lappy at a quick fix for it and tried something on the off chance and switched it on last night and it worked whoooooooohooooooooooo i love you microsoft but it only lasted 3min before crashing. I have no red ring of death now but a console that switches on to tease me then crashes nnnnnooooooooooooooo………..Evil Bill i hate you.
August 14, 2010 at 3:10 pm
1st time when i got the 360 i actually thought i got the RROD until i noticed the back the AV cords wernt plugged in
November 29, 2010 at 5:43 pm
yeah, we've all had those derp moments. i've had them with my printer a lot
August 6, 2010 at 5:54 am
Curb stomp that piece of shit!
June 28, 2010 at 9:56 pm
well.. one idea joe, is this.. you open the xbox 360, get down to all of the circuitry and find an x shaped metal plate, remove it, take the heat syncs off, place a pad, which has 2 copper pennies wrapped in electrical tape, on the four chips and use heat resistant let or epoxy on it and close it all back they way it was and boom, the xbox 360 will work again and never have the rrod ever again
ps.. i'm a ps3 person
June 11, 2010 at 12:47 pm
microsoft has been great to me, even though i badmouth them all the time. i have/had a 1st generation Xbox that RRoDed. and have had it replaced 5 times since then! actualy expecting my new Xbox to arive today or tomarrow. i guess because mine was a first gen it came with a 3 year warrenty. "/
i dont know if they repaired my console or just keep sending me different broken ones because the serial number is never consistant.
anyway i feel your pain joe. regardless of how well they handle the problem… THERE SHOULD NOT FUCKING BE ONE IN THE FIRST GODDAMNED PLACE! Bastards!!
May 12, 2010 at 2:11 am
Angry joe i can fix this if you wont with a charge of a $1 for screws and bolts as i pay for the rest i LOVE your show great review. and the period of time is 1 week but i swear the 360 will be fix for eternity some times it will lag but not often there 12% lags and the other percent it will work
April 12, 2010 at 12:49 pm
Hell I have no freakin idea about the 360 and the Ps3. Basically both of them have problems and to me that's a bunch of BULLCRAP! I honestly think that it's a waste of your peresious time and money to get a new console, and I really won't SCEA and Microsoft game studios have to change these problems fast!
There're reasons I'm not picking a new PS console because you now can't play your ps2 games on it that's a bunch of BS! also, the red ring of death? I don't know crap about it, if there's any body out there that can tell me about this I'll be wise about what console to buy. And this is just a problem to me that Xbox 360s can't play all Xbox games WTF!?!?!
Also to just clear this up I'm not picking witch game console is better okay! Both are good and both have problems it's just that so let's just stop with that.
March 31, 2010 at 6:19 pm
this has never happened to me but joe dont u have a ps3?
March 28, 2010 at 11:44 pm
Just happened to me today Joe. I've had this thing for 2 years and I get the RROD just now. What a joke! I was just using it last night with no problems wtf happened!
March 23, 2010 at 3:57 pm
Dead Skeletor if he has RRoD he cant go on live -_-
March 15, 2010 at 9:26 pm
Good day. First I would like to say that I actually like your web site, just identified it last week but I have been reading it ever since then.
I seem to be to consent with most of your thoughts and opinions and this submit is no different. totally
Thank you for any wonderful blog and I hope you retain up the beneficial function. If you do I will continue to checked out it.
Possess a excellent day.
March 14, 2010 at 11:47 pm
lol this is exactly how i acted when i had my first red ring of death in the first 1:25 there rest is how ill probably act when i have to repair it my self.
March 13, 2010 at 11:45 am
Hey, I came across this post and found it very, very infomative. I just wanted to thank the author.
March 7, 2010 at 11:38 pm
i mean i couldn't buy bad company 2 sry commented on the wrong video…crap.
March 7, 2010 at 11:36 pm
i wish i could buy the game but "i haz no money"…:'(….but im geting final fantasy XIII and i hope joe plz review it…im begging you here!…plz.atleast just search it on google and read about it and say wat u think.
March 7, 2010 at 11:05 pm
If you are going to buy a new one buy a membership to Sam's Club and buy it there. If you keep all the parts and the box they will return it for a new one forever as long as you have the receipt. The $40 membership fee is cheaper then any warranty. If they give you any lip just tell them you are going to call the complaint hotline on them.
March 7, 2010 at 9:51 pm
Come to the Dark side Joe!
March 7, 2010 at 4:47 pm
Hey Joe
This happened to me 4 weeks ago and my warranty expired about a year ago. My console had also had a warranty repair back in 2007 so your situation here is very similar to mine. I called Microsoft to find out what I could do and was told that if I was the original owner (which I was), and I had registered the console when I bought it (which I did) and if I did not break the warranty sticker or opened the unit ever(which I never have), then Microsoft would fix it for FREE.
The most important thing is that you're the original owner – as if you buy a second hand console from somebody, the warranty does not transfer. If you can quote the serial number, the time of the last repair, your email address, physical address and phone number at the time of the last repair – they will repair or replace it for FREE.
My console was replaced and back to me in two and a half weeks. I hope this helps.
March 6, 2010 at 6:10 pm
Where do I sign for a class action lawsuit, I am pissed, my Xbox of a few years went out while playing MW2,… this RROD is just to sell more consoles, Guaranteed, and FUCK Warranties … dont mean shit, I had to buy an arcade Xbox and just pulled the harddrive from my RROD Xbox, but still, its BULLSHIT! Please, ANGRY ARMY, lets get this in front of Microsoft, and make a difference…
March 5, 2010 at 2:57 pm
if i remember correctly even though ive had 360 sence came out an ive never had the red rings you can send the 360 in as many times as you want an they will fix it it has nothing to do with the warranty cause its there fault that this problem exists my freind had sent his in twice sence an his warrantly has been over for along
March 7, 2010 at 1:52 am
To my recollection as long as it dies WITHIN the extended 3 year warranty and you get a RRoD or in my case yesterday RLoD (Red Light of Death "E 74") you can send in and get it repaired for free and it renews the warranty on it for I have herd another year. Keep in mind too that you WONT get your original X-Box back that you sent in for repair you actually receive another refurbished console. So you could technically send it in for repairs and get one back that was even more screwed than the one before it.
March 18, 2010 at 2:50 am
Joe I will fix it for free that is what I do. I normally charge but to keep you up and running I will fix it for free.
Just message me on live Dead Skeletor is my tag.
March 30, 2010 at 4:14 am
i too had the xbox since the day it came out and mine broke after about 4 months back then there was no warranty i had to pay £60 for microsofts console flaw, so i got my xbox back 8 more months and i have rrod again this time i used the warrenty but it got lost in the mail so i had to wait a further 3 weeks. I got rrod recently so i took my xbox to gamestation and payed £40 to swap it with two year guarentee microsoft are unrealible money grabbing bastards, but i still love there console lol.

subset: commoncrawl


text:
Beth Szczerowski has joined the Hope College staff as assistant director of alumni and parent relations.
She started in the position on Monday, Jan. 4. She is responsible for a number of the events, activities and services at the college for alumni and parents and families of students, and works with the program's director on a variety of other aspects of the program.
As assistant director, Szczerowski will assist with the college's regional events and annual on-campus events for alumni, parents and students hosted by the office. She holds additional responsibility for involving alumni and parent volunteers in the college's programs, and for communicating with alumni, parents and friends of the college. She will also assist the program's director, Scott Travis, with strategic planning and program development, and in promoting financial support of the college to alumni, parents, friends and families of Hope.
A 2000 Hope graduate, Szczerowski brings extensive experience in event planning, marketing and community relations to her work at the college. Most recently, she served as the Grand Rapids Children's Museum's marketing and membership manager. In this role, she increased the museum's brand identity in West Michigan and broadened the organization's communications. By making these lasting changes, the museum saw an increase in admissions and was able to provide an environment of unstructured play to a greater number of children and their adults.
She also coordinated the museum's fundraising and program events, including the well-known "Kids at Heart" spring fundraiser. This annual event, with its fun theme and playful atmosphere, raised more than $300,000 under her guidance, and introduced thousands of individuals to the museum's mission.
Szczerowski joined the museum staff in 2005 as member and events manager, and was named marketing and membership manager in January 2009. She had previously been with Goodwill Industries in Grandville, first as a development associate and then as marketing and development supervisor.
A native of Zeeland, she holds a Bachelor of Arts in communication with a minor in business from Hope. Her activities as a student included the Sigma Sigma sorority, the Nykerk Cup competition and the student-organized Dance Marathon fund-raiser held on behalf of Helen DeVos Children's Hospital. She also participated in the Chicago Metropolitan Center off-campus study program.
Szczerowski currently lives in Zeeland with her husband, Andrew, and their two small children.


text:
SPOKANE, Wash., Feb. 23 (UPI) -- Kevin Pangos and Kelly Olynyk combined for 32 points Saturday, propelling No. 3 Gonzaga to an 81-50 rout of San Diego.
Pangos provided 18 points. Olynyk helped out with 14 and nine rebounds.
Elias Harris complemented their efforts with 12 points and five boards for Gonzaga (27-2, 14-0 WCC), which grabbed the top spot of the West Coast Conference with its 10th straight triumph.
The Toreros (13-16, 6-8) got 19 points from Chris Manresa.


text:
Media looked past 9-11 Commission documentation of Bush administration fabrications
While the media has focused in recent months on issues such as whether Senator John Kerry took fire while saving the life of a fellow swift boat crew member more than 30 years ago and whether President George W. Bush's commanding officer wrote memos bearing his name, an issue of at least equal importance -- whether the Bush administration lied to the 9-11 Commission and to the American people about the events of September 11 -- has been almost completely ignored. *
In fact, were reporters to devote anything approaching the time and energy consumed by the disputed CBS memos to the 9-11 Commission's conclusions, they would find strong evidence that the administration has misled the country regarding one of the most catastrophic days in our country's history. In a review of the 9-11 Commission report in The New York Review of Books, regular contributor Elizabeth Drew noted several examples of Bush administration distortions and apparent lies, of which the report provides strong evidence. Following are two of the most flagrant.
Bush administration officials said no one could predict terrorists would use airplanes as missiles
As Slate.com has reported, several prominent Bush administration officials have asserted that there was no way the government could have known that terrorists would attempt to hijack airplanes and crash them into buildings, as they did at the World Trade Center and the Pentagon on September 11, 2001. In May 2002, national security adviser Condoleezza Rice said: "I don't think anyone could have predicted that these people would take an airplane and slam it into the World Trade Center" ; then-White House Press Secretary Ari Fleischer echoed Rice's remarks: "Never did we imagine what would take place on September 11 where people use those airplanes as missiles and weapons."
In her testimony before the 9-11 Commission, though, Rice retreated from her remarks, stating, "I probably should have said, 'I could not have imagined'" such an occurrence, but she only conceded that she couldn't promise that there "might not have been a report here or a report there that reached somebody in our midst." USA Today reported a similar remark by President Bush on April 18: "Nobody in our government, at least, and I don't think the prior government, could envision flying airplanes into buildings on such a massive scale." CNN noted on March 24 that Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld told the Commission: "I knew of no intelligence during the six-plus months leading up to September 11 to indicate terrorists would hijack commercial airlines, use them as missiles to fly into the Pentagon or the World Trade Center towers."
However, as the 9-11 Commission report documented, such a "possibility was imaginable, and imagined," citing an August 1999 Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) Civil Aviation Security intelligence office report that warned on the potential of a "suicide hijacking operation," and that the North American Aerospace Defense Command had "developed exercises to counter such a threat." The commission reported that an August 6, 2001, Presidential Daily Briefing entitled "Bin Laden Determined to Strike in U.S.," which was received by Bush, stated that although the FBI had "not been able to corroborate" a 1998 report that Osama bin Laden was seeking to "hijack a US aircraft," "FBI information since that time indicate[d] patterns of suspicious activity in this country consistent with preparations for hijackings or other types of attacks, including recent surveillance of federal buildings in New York."
Just weeks before 9-11, the Commission report also noted, the Central Intelligence Agency warned British and French officials of "'subjects involved in suspicious 747 flight training' that described [Al Qaeda operative Zacarias] Moussaoui as a possible 'suicide hijacker.'" And the week before the terrorist attacks, a Minneapolis FBI agent told the FAA that Moussaoui was "an Islamic extremist preparing for some future act in furtherance of radical fundamentalist goals" related to flight training he had received. The commission also documented that on August 23, 2001, then-Director of Central Intelligence George J. Tenet "was briefed about the Moussaoui case in a briefing titled 'Islamic Extremist Learns to Fly.'"
The Bush administration's claims of ignorance are cast into even greater doubt by a report that a hypothetical event resembling the actual events of September 11 was the subject of a military training exercise less than a year before 9-11. As United Press International documented, on October 24, 2000, the Pentagon ran a "mass casualty exercise, which simulated crisis response in a scenario where a hijacked aircraft crashed into the Pentagon."
Cheney and Bush claimed Cheney received Bush's approval to shoot down hijacked planes on 9-11
Both President Bush and Vice President Dick Cheney have maintained, and testified to the 9-11 Commission, that the order to shoot down airplanes hijacked by Al Qaeda on the morning of September 11 was authorized by the president himself. But the commission's report indicated that the commission found no evidence to support such a claim based on the review of an array of documentary sources from that day.
The report noted Bush and Cheney's account of the events in question: Cheney "stated that he called the President to discuss the rules of engagement" for shooting down the hijacked airplanes if they would not divert their path on the morning of September 11, Cheney "said the President signed off on that concept," and "[t]he President said he remembered such a conversation."
But the commission found "no documentary evidence for this call." The report includes a caveat that "the relevant sources are incomplete," but does not say specifically what information the commission lacked. The commission cited the following sources in reaching its conclusion that there was no evidence for Bush and Cheney's claim: "(1) phone logs of the White House switchboard; (2) notes of Lewis Libby [Cheney's chief of staff], Mrs. [Lynne] Cheney, and Ari Fleischer; (3) the tape (and then transcript) of the air threat conference call; and (4) Secret Service and White House Situation Room logs, as well as four separate White House Military Office logs (the PEOC Watch Log, the PEOC Shelter Log, the Communications Log, and the 9-11 Log)."
The report then noted that after Cheney twice ordered the "authorization to engage," he called President Bush to obtain authorization at the behest of White House deputy chief of staff Joshua Bolten. According to the report, Bolten wanted Cheney to "confirm the engage order" and "make sure the President was told" Cheney had executed it, and Bolten "said he had not heard any prior discussion on the subject with the President." The hijacked planes crashed before the authorization order was put into effect.
Drew, in her New York Review of Books review, noted that in response to the commission's suggestion that Cheney made the order without Bush's authorization, "the White House reacted in a lengthy letter to the commission ... propos[ing] substitute language that portrayed the President's performance that morning in a more positive light." And, she wrote that Cheney "made a vehement phone call to the chairman, Thomas Kean, and vice-chairman, Lee Hamilton, protesting the staff report's implication that he had taken charge and ordered the planes shot down." Despite the protests by the White House, Drew noted, the commission's report maintained an account of the events that suggests Cheney, not Bush, made the order.
* An MMFA LexisNexis database search on September 24 of the "All News" directory for media coverage -- after the 9-11 Commission report's July 22 release -- of Bush administration assertions that were contradicted by the evidence amassed in the report produced minimal results. Relevant results were defined as articles that note the inconsistencies between the Bush administration accounts and the 9-11 Commission report findings:
A search for "rice and predict! and airplane and slam and world trade center and date is after July 20, 2004" produced six relevant results.
A search for "Fleischer and imagine and airplanes as missiles and date is after July 20, 2004" produced zero relevant results.
A search for "rice and I could not have imagined and date is after July 20, 2004" produced zero relevant results.
A search for "Bush and envision flying airplanes into buildings and date is after July 20, 2004" produced zero relevant results.
A search for "9/11 Commission and imaginable and imagined and date is after July 20, 2004" produced zero relevant results.
A search for "cheney and (shoot /20 plane or airplane) or (rules of engagement) or (9/11 commission and documentary evidence and call) and date is after july 20, 2004" produced two relevant results.


text:
Ninety percent of drivers are above-average, according to a recent poll I just made up based on common claims I hear on the Internet. That figure goes beyond 100 percent when the driver has four-wheel drive and winter tires, or so I'm led to believe. In reality, it doesn't hurt to have both on a Subaru.
Once the numbers are all tallied up, Subaru sales are expected to have grown by a staggering 11% for 2013. Our esteemed big cheese, Matt Hardigree, proffered a theory a while back to explain why Subaru is doing so well in the United States:
They continued to build the cars they're known for. Yeah, the Legacy is a bit ungainly, but white people in cold ass climates looooooove Outbacks. Can't afford an Outback? A Subaru XV is just a raised Subaru Impreza with funky body-cladding, but people are eating that up.
Did they make the new Subaru Forrester gigantic and soft and dumb? Nope. They just continued to make it better.
While I'm no scientist, that sounds like a highly accurate hypothesis to me. But I'd like to offer a supplemental theory to Subaru's recent success as well. Four-wheel-drive is fun.
And while Subaru doesn't build a fully 4WD lineup anymore, owing to the BRZ, that hasn't taken away at all from its brand image of making wintery cars. As the ad above shows, 4WD will get you to work when it's snowing outside.
But that's not all. While 4WD and snow tires can lead to overconfidence when the blizzards of a frozen hellish wasteland have descended upon your little New England/Minnesota/New Jersey/Miami town because global warming, they can also undoubtedly lead to massive amounts of fun given a big enough field and a heavy enough dusting of snow.
And if there's anything people love, it's fun. In unexperienced hands rear-wheel-drive can cause nothing but spins, and front-wheel-drive can cause nothing but boring understeer, but with all of the wheels being driven it's relatively easy to have the biggest off-road powerslide of your life when snow is coming down.
Subaru's figured that out. Maybe one day everyone else will, too.


text:
THE NATIONAL Rifle Association deliberated for an entire week after the Newtown tragedy, and their best response is a call for an armed guard in every public school ("The NRA's extremist fantasy," Editorial, Dec. 22).
If one extends this knee-jerk response to every shooting, then the NRA no doubt would be happy with armed police officers in every theater, shopping mall, etc. The long-term logical consequence of this argument is armed guards in every public space, just in case.
How ironic then that many supporters of the Second Amendment believe it is intended to allow ordinary citizens to defend themselves from an aggressive government, yet now the NRA is suggesting a more aggressive govenment, via an expanded, armed police force, to defend us from an armed citizenry.
Contradiction, anyone?


text:
The superb oceanfront carribean resorts at The Crane, the first of which opened in 2001, offer guests a new standard in luxury oceanfront accommodation. You can inhale the original atmosphere of The Crane while appreciating spectacular ocean views. Here, charm and comfort is everything.
Extremely spacious, these oceanfront residences, feature hardwood or stone floors, 12' ceilings, authentic Barbadian furnishings and décor, and in most cases private ocean view pools. Also included are fully equipped kitchens or kitchenettes, perfect for dining in or for entertaining al fresco on spacious terraces.
All room categories feature an iron and ironing board, hair dryer and razor point, safety deposit box, direct dial telephone with free calls to most international destinations and free WiFi and dataport access.
- Address: The Crane, Barbados
- Price: $1,170,000
- Bedrooms: 1
- Bathrooms: 2
- Phone Number: 1 (246) 230-1623


text:
2013: Watch out for star-studded films, remakes in Tamil, Telugu
Entertainment will have no bounds in the Tamil and Telugu film industry in 2013, as an exciting mix of star-studded films and umpteen number of remakes are getting lined up to hit the theatres.
The new year will begin with one of the most anticipated films - "Vishwaroopam", a Tamil-Hindi bilingual starring Kamal Haasan, who has also directed it. It will be the first film to be released on a direct-to-home (DTH) platform, a day before its release in theatres. It is releasing Jan 11.
Three more films will compete with Kamal's film during the Pongal weekend. After his disastrous "Saguni", Karthi will return action-drama "Alex Pandian". Vishal, who didn't have a single release in 2012, will be back with romantic-action "Samar". Santhanam's debut production, romantic-comedy "Kanna Laddu Thinna Aasaya", will also release during the same weekend.
Pongal is the biggest festival season for south Indians and since it is celebrated over four days, most films want to cash in on this opportunity. This year, including two big Telugu releases, four Tamil films, will clash at the box-office, said trade analyst Trinath.
With more than 400 theatres in Tamil Nadu already being blocked for the release of "Vishwaroopam", a Rs.95-crore budget film, it will be tough for other films to find a healthy number of theatres.
Superstar Rajinikanth will come all guns blazing in Tamil period-drama "Kochadaiyaan", directed by his daughter Soundarya Ashwin. This will be his return to the silver screen after three long years since "Enthiran".
After registering flops in 2012, top actors Suriya, Vikram and Ajith, can hope to taste success in 2013.
Suriya will return as an angry and righteous cop in "Singam 2", while Vikram has two promising films lined up -- Tamil-Hindi bilingual "David", which is coming out in February, and Shankar's romantic-thriller "I".
Ajith will return in Vishnuvardhan's untitled action film, hoping to resurrect his action hero avatar.
R. Srinivasan, distributor, feels that "stars will continue doing commercial entertainers to keep themselves in the race. It will be very unlikely to see a star to break the monotony and experiment unless the project is exciting and guarantees high returns".
Some Tamil films to look forward to in 2013 are "Kadal", "Aadhi Bhagwan", "Paradesi", "Biriyani", "Irandam Ulagam" and "Mariyaan".
Since most top heroes could only manage doing one film in 2012, they would want to do more films in 2013, says Trinath.
"Be it Mahesh Babu, Allu Arjun, Ajith and Suriya... all these actors managed to do only one film in 2012. They will all hope to work faster and release as many films as possible in this year. Mahesh has signed two new films and hopes to finish and release both within the year. Likewise, Pawan Kalyan also hopes to work on multiple projects to save time," he said.
Ram Charan Teja will be seen in three films in 2013.
His most ambitious film "Naayak", directed by V.V. Vinayak and "Seethamma Vakitlo Sirimalle Chettu", another big budget multi-starrer with Mahesh Babu and Victory Venkatesh in the lead, will lock horns on the same day Jan 11.
Two other films of Ram are Telugu action-drama "Yevadu" and Hindi-Telugu bilingual "Zanjeer", a remake of Amitabh Bachchan's super hit film of the same name.
"Leading heroes will continue doing films with a predefined formula because it is safe and a rapidly growing trend in Bollywood too," said Telugu director Madhura Sreedhar.
Junior NTR will be seen in "Baadshah", directed by Srinu Vaitla, in the summer of next year. And Venkatesh will been as a don in crime-thriller "Shadow", directed by Meher Ramesh.
Some other Telugu films to look forward to in 2013 are "Mirchi", "Auto Nagar Surya", "Bhai", "Balupu" and "Gouravam".
Meanwhile, Bollywood will continue to cash in on regional remakes, feels Srinivasan.
"The number of remakes is sure to increase this year. Bollywood will continue to cash in on regional films, both in Tamil and Telugu, as most remakes of the recent past did exceptionally good business. Most of these films comfortably made it to the Rs.100-crore club", he said.
The year 2013 will welcome films such as Prabhu Deva's "Ramaiya Vasta Vaiya", a remake of Telugu blockbuster "Nuvvostanante Nenoddantana" and Salman Khan's "Kick", which is a remake of a Telugu super hit film of the same name.


text:
Child interview case deemed moot
The case arose after petitioner Bob Camreta, an Oregon child protective services caseworker, interviewed respondent S.G., a nine-year-old girl, at school regarding allegations that S.G. was being sexually abused by her father. James Alford, a county deputy sheriff and the petitioner in a parallel case, also attended the interview, which was conducted without either a warrant or the consent of S.G.'s parents. S.G.'s mother, Sarah Greene, sued Camreta and Alford under Section 1983, claiming that the interview had violated S.G.'s Fourth Amendment rights.
The Ninth Circuit agreed that the interview violated S.G.'s Fourth Amendment rights, but it held that Camreta and Alford were entitled to qualified immunity. And although they had ultimately prevailed at the Ninth Circuit, Camreta and Alford filed a petition for certiorari, asking the Supreme Court to grant review to clarify the underlying Fourth Amendment issue. However, S.G. did not file a cross-petition seeking review of the qualified immunity ruling.
In an opinion by Justice Kagan, which was joined by the Chief Justice and Justices Scalia, Ginsburg, and Alito, the Court vacated the Ninth Circuit's decision in part and remanded. The Court then declined to rule on the underlying Fourth Amendment question, however, finding the matter moot.
The Court first considered whether it could review a case at all when the party petitioning for certiorari had prevailed below. Although S.G. had argued that the case did not meet Article III's "case or controversy" requirements, the Court rejected this argument. It cited two prior cases in which it had granted certiorari at the behest of the party that prevailed below, emphasizing that the relevant inquiry is "whether the litigant retains the necessary personal stake in the appeal." S.G.'s stake in the appeal is unquestioned: she wants a determination of whether her Fourth Amendment rights were violated. But, the Court continued, Camreta also has a stake in the outcome of the case: conducting child interviews is something he customarily does in the course of his job duties, so he has an interest in knowing whether such actions will render him vulnerable to liability in the future.
The Court acknowledged that, as S.G. had argued, the Court generally had a "settled practice" of declining to consider cases at the request of the prevailing party. However, it explained that it had created an exception for cases which present a "policy reaso[n] . . . of sufficient importance to allow an appeal" by the prevailing party below. Qualified immunity, it continued, presents precisely this kind of policy justification. First, the underlying constitutional issues in qualified immunity cases affect how officials conduct their duties. Second, because Bivens makes clear that qualified immunity is not available for violations of "clearly established" constitutional or statutory rights, jurisprudence on constitutional questions determines what official behaviors may be protected by qualified immunity in the future. And, finally, the Court has empowered lower courts to review the constitutional question even in qualified immunity rulings precisely so that the law may evolve "" the same rationale applies to the Court's review of the underlying constitutional question in this case.
Then, as the Justices' questions at oral argument foreshadowed, the Court determined that it is barred from deciding the case for another jurisdictional reason: it is moot. Since the interview occurred nine years ago, S.G. has moved to Florida and has no plans to return to Oregon. She is also now either seventeen or eighteen years old and (the Court assumes) about to graduate from high school. Therefore, the Court explains, S.G. has no ongoing stake in the litigation, as she has no need "" either currently or in the future — for protection from the allegedly unconstitutional behavior. The Court notes that S.G. faces "not the slightest possibility of being seized in a school in the Ninth Circuit's jurisdiction as part of a child abuse investigation."
The Court's ordinary practice when a case becomes moot while appeal is pending is vacatur, and it follows this course here. The rationale behind vacating judgments of cases that are moot on appeal is to ensure that when a party has sought review but cannot receive it, it will not be "treated as if there had been a review"; the practice also prevents unreviewable decisions from having legal consequences. If the Court did not vacate the Ninth Circuit's Fourth Amendment ruling, that ruling would have legal consequences (a point which animates the first part of the Court's opinion, in which it holds that it has jurisdiction to review the case).
Justice Scalia filed a three-sentence concurring opinion, in which he notes that he would consider terminating the Court's "extraordinary practice of ruling upon constitutional questions unnecessarily when the defendant possesses qualified immunity" were the appropriate case to present itself.
Justice Sotomayor filed a separate concurrence, joined by Justice Breyer, in which she concurs with the Court's judgment that the case is moot and should be vacated. She would not, however, reach the first threshold question of whether the Court may hear the appeal of a prevailing party in this circumstance, when the Court could dispose of the case based solely on mootness.
Justice Kennedy, joined by Justice Thomas, dissented. Noting that the "Court reviews judgments, not statements in opinions," he characterizes the Court's decision allowing review of the underlying constitutional question in cases such as this one as "an erroneous and unbounded exception to an essential principle of judicial restraint." In his view, "[p]arties who have obtained all requested relief may not seek review here." Justice Kennedy next expresses concern that the Court's ruling in Pearson v. Callahan, which gave the courts of appeals "permission" to make rulings on the underlying constitutional issue in Section 1983 suits, even if they ultimately dispose of the suit on qualified immunity grounds, has sown confusion and "" in this case "" unavoidably runs up against the Court's rejection of advisory opinions. Justice Kennedy concludes by observing that "[i]f today's decision proves to be more than an isolated anomaly, the Court might find it necessary to reconsider its special permission that the Courts of Appeals may issue unnecessary merits determinations in qualified immunity cases with binding precedent."
Recommended Citation: Jennifer Clark, Child interview case deemed moot, SCOTUSblog (May. 29, 2011, 5:53 PM), https://www.scotusblog.com/2011/05/child-interview-case-deemed-moot/


text:
Auction #31:Manuscript Critique & Signed Copy of SECOND SIGHT from Editor Cheryl Klein
Welcome to KidLit Cares, an online talent auction to benefit the Red Cross relief effort to help communities recover from Superstorm Sandy. Agents, editors, authors, and illustrators have donated various services to be auctioned off to the highest bidder, with donations being made directly to the Red Cross disaster relief fund. You can read more about KidLit Cares here. Now, on to the auction!
Opening Bid: $30
Auction Ends: Tuesday, November 13, 2012 at 10pm EST. (Any bids submitted in comments after that time will be void.)
A note about last-minute bidding: If you are used to computerized Ebay auctions that end at an exact, given second, please know that the KidLit Cares auctions don't work quite that way. Each auction ends when I post the "Auction closed" comment. I do that when my computer turns to 10pm, but because I have multiple auctions to close at that time (also because I am human) it will not be a totally exact thing. (I have been working for years to try and clone myself, but to no avail, and I am particularly bummed about that at the moment. Those cloned Kates would have been great at closing auctions all at once.) At any rate, the winning bid is the high bid before the Auction Closed comment, even if the time on your computer reads slightly after 10:00. Thanks for understanding!
If you'd like to bid on this auction, check the current high bid and place a higher bid by leaving your name and bid amount in the comments, along with some way to contact you (email, FB or Twitter…I'm not fussy.) Winners will be notified when the auction ends and should be prepared to make an online donation to the Red Cross Disaster Relief fund in the amount of the high bid at that time. After you've made your donation, you'll forward your receipt to me, and I'll put you in touch with the person who donated the service you won so that the two of you can work out the details about how and when. All services will be provided at the convenience of both the person making the donation and the auction winner, but this should happen within three months of the auction's end unless something else is agreed upon by both parties.
Good luck and thanks for bidding!


text:
Cut mainframe software costs with reporting insights and predictive planning
- Understand what's driving IBM mainframe software charges with the easy-to-use dashboards, intelligent discovery, and predictive analytics of Cost Analyzer for zEnterprise®.
- Easily identify key drivers of peak resource usage that contribute to MLC costs.
- Get insightful reports and model the cost impact of changes, while tracking and forecasting your software budget.
- Predict the costs associated with deploying new applications, selecting a new pricing model, or making changes to your workloads.


text:
Hostal La Palma legal disclaimers
This website belongs to La Palma Fornells S.L., with address at Plaça s'Algaret, 3, 07748 - Fornells (Minorca, Balearic Islands) and NIF (fiscal identity number) B07480387.
Link policy
Links with other websites that appear on https://www.hostallapalma.com are merely offered as information for the users and therefore https://www.hostallapalma.com does not take responsibility for the products, services or contents that are offered or provided on these destination pages located in a separate domain.
Intellectual and Industrial Property Rights
All the material that appears on https://www.hostallapalma.com belongs to La Palma Fornell, S.L. and is protected by Intellectual Property Rights as is established in the Spanish LPI (Intellectual Property Law). Any intentional unauthorised use of this material will be taken as a breach of these rights and could result in the corresponding sanctions. It is therefore forbidden to reproduce, exploit, edit, distribute or disseminate the contents of this website without the necessary permissions from the author.
Data Protection and the Use of Personal Information Policy
The data provided via the website is stored in a data file belonging to La Palma Fornells, S.L. that has been declared, as is required, to the Spanish Agency of Data Protection. This data will be used exclusively in order to carry out the service applied for and for later sharing promotions or services within the company's sector. Under no circumstances will they be supplied to third parties, besides those required by law or associated companies or partners of La Palma Fornells, S.L. The data files may be managed by organisations contracted to carry out the data protection and storage. These organisations have agreed to comply with the same conditions imposed by La Palma Fornells, S.L. as laid out by the Data Protection Law.
Our system uses cookies. Please check our usage policy.
Jurisdiction and applicable laws
The user accepts that the legislation applied to these services is Spanish. Any controversies over the interpretation or application of these clauses will be dealt with under the courts and tribunals of the consumers address. In the case where the client is not a resident of Spain, the courts used will be those in Minorca.


text: NASHVILLE, Tenn. After 12 games in which they lost more than they won and seemingly couldnt find the back of the net with a GPS, the Nashville Predators appear to have snapped out of their slump. Going into Tuesday night visit from the Washington Capitals, Nashville has won its last four games, scoring 16 goals. Its power play is one of the top 10 in the NHL and it is also starting to get the even-strength goal scoring that was such an issue in October https://www.predatorsuniformshop.com/Alexander_Radulov_Jersey-48. What more, the Predators are finally getting a chance to play some home games. Saturday night 5-4 shootout victory over Pittsburgh opened a stretch where they play 10 of 14 games in raucous Bridgestone Arena, where they are 4-1-1.Article continues below ... It good to be back in front of our fans and to hear some of our cheers when we score because we havent had that happen in a while, left winger Filip Forsberg said. It is going to be a lot of fun and were going to take advantage of it. If the past is any indication, Forsberg is the most likely to take advantage of it with Washington . The former Capitals prospect, who general manager David Poile acquired at the 2013 trading deadline for Martin Erat in what will probably end up as one of the most lopsided trades in NHL history, has five goals and four assists in six career games against Washington. Forsberg has been Nashville most dangerous offensive player this season, scoring eight goals and adding eight assists in 16 games. He registered two helpers on the power play against Pittsburgh, and his seven total shots against the Penguins indicate a guy who might break a five-game goal drought against a favorite mark. Just as important to coach Peter Laviolette, though, is getting points from his third and fourth lines. Calle Jarnkrok delivered a goal that snapped a 3-3 tie early in the third period Saturday night https://www.predatorsuniformshop.com/Rem_Pitlick_Jersey-111, and Miikka Salomaki set up Kyle Turris first goal with the Predators early in the second period. Balance is great if you can get it, Laviolette said. I know it wasnt there at the beginning of the year and it was a hot topic. The Capitals figure to test the Predators recent offensive prowess, in part because of the play of goalie Braden Holtby. He picked up his 200th career win Friday night in stopping Pittsburgh 4-1, then saved 29 of 30 shots and all three shootout attempts Sunday night when Washington edged Edmonton 2-1. Included in that performance were six saves in a 71-second stretch late in the second period as the Oilers kept pumping pucks at the net Nick Bonino Jersey. That was a pretty stupid sequence, forward Tom Wilson said. It amazing every night you get to watch him. It an absolute treat. He one of the elite goalies. Holtby figures to match up with Nashville Pekka Rinne , who at age 35 is playing some of the best hockey of his career. Rinne stopped 26 shots against Pittsburgh and came up with a big glove save on Evgeni Malkin in the shootout.


text: During my 85-day hunger strike against Prime Minister Stephen Harper's New Jim Crow-style crime Bill C-10, the deceptively christened "Safe Streets and Communities Act", a prominent opposition MP told me hunger protests weren't part of the process of democratic engagement in Canada. I was shocked and disappointed. First, during our conversation onContinue reading


text:
The properties of calcium carbonate in construction have been well known for centuries. Ancient Egyptians built their pyramids from this material and the Romans later used it to erect their famous architectural structures. As a natural mineral, calcium carbonate has a multitude of characteristics that make it an ideal raw material for a wide variety of uses in concrete, asphalt, roofing, tiles and bricks. For each of these applications, there is a tailor-made product available with an optimal balance of fineness and particle size distribution for the specified purpose.
Calcium carbonate fines (CCF) in the form of various Betocarb grades are used in the concrete market as high-quality fillers in concrete products such as paving stones, tubes and sewage tanks, as well as in ready-mixed and pre-cast concrete.
The workability of semi-dry, plastic or self-compacting concretes and self-leveling mortars is improved by using CCFs. The particle size distribution in combination with cement and admixtures can be optimized, resulting in increased green strength, better pumping ability and less bleeding, for example. For self-compacting concretes, CCFs have proven to be the most reliable and practical industrially produced stabilizer.
CCFs accelerate the hydration of the cement matrix, resulting in higher early strength figures. Durability is improved by better permeability. The light and stable color makes the product more aesthetic, rendering it ideal for architectural applications.
Lightweight fillers and polyethylene fibers are just two examples from the wide range of specialties that Omya distributes for concrete applications.
Omya's Product Portfolio
For further information, please use our contact form
Interdisciplinary Research
Minerals & Surfaces
Pigment Chemical Engineering
Research Network
Performance & Efficiency
Innovative Product Highlights
Intellectual Property
Services & Support
Materials Characterization
Microbiology Services
Quality Control
Technical Services
Innovation and Application Development
Secured Raw Material Supply
ISO Certified Quality Control
Customer Service
Customized Distribution Offer
Local Knowledge - Global Understanding


text:
Thoughts on The BachMonday, March 01, 2010
I watched The Bach by myself tonight and have waaaay too many opinions to keep to myself. So, these are them…
- Knew it was coming. Still want to barf.
- That was the longest St. Lucia commercial I have ever seen.
- I love you, Tenley. But stop talking about your divorce. [His mom asked how you get along with your sister.]
- Jake did not receive his intuition from his mother.
- I. loved. the sister in law, Laura.
- THAT was the ugliest tie I have ever seen.
- KATE GOSSELIN ON DWTS?? I bet Jon is pissed. That is ratings gold.
- I bet the Pavelka family is NOT looking forward to Thanksgiving this year.
- Did Vienna get plastic surgery?? Something looks different about her face…
- That Wing of Love song is truly terrible.
- Everything about that show affirmed everything I felt when I was single. Even the decent guys who had good character and good families still went for skanky girls and overlooked the great ones (who don't have big boobs and hair extensions).


text:
sugar free white peppermint center in sugar free chocolate
"The Sweetest Spot on the Mountain" in suburban Woodland Park, New Jersey (formerly West Paterson) has been the home of our candy kitchen since 1958. All of our chocolates are homemade right here using only the finest and freshest ingredients possible. We invite you to indulge yourself in the best homemade chocolates you have ever tasted!
Woodland Park Store and Factory 350 Rifle Camp Road Woodland Park, NJ 07424 973.684.1496
Current HoursMonday-Saturday 9-5Sunday CLOSED
Essex Mall 891 Bloomfield Ave. West Caldwell, NJ 07006 973.227.0819
Current HoursMonday-Saturday 10-5Sunday CLOSED
© 2019 BROMILOW. All rights reserved. Design by Creative Web Inc.. Privacy policy | Terms and Conditions
use coupon "pickup" (all lower case no spaces) for ALL pickup orders. Allow
24-48 hours processing time


text:
The National Football League, as everyone knows, is a not-for-profit charity, the chief purpose of which is to promote the growth of the sport of football. Sure, it rakes in hundreds of millions of tax-exempt dollars annually, and pays its executives tens of millions, but why not? Who can quibble with its sterling track record of football promotion?
Football is safer than it's ever been, and we've got Goodell to thank for that. He surely earned at least half of his salary just by thinking up new ways to penalize thuggish players for illegal hits to the head while allowing us to enjoy clean, healthy helmet-to-helmet smashes, which are still awesome.
When not making sure we can watch the game with a clear conscience, Goodell's NFL is writing big checks to other charities—why, in 2012 alone the league donated $2.3 million. $2.1 million of that was paid to the Pro Football Hall of Fame, surely a worthy choice. (What entity does more to promote the American values of football better than Canton's majestic museum?) And none of this touches on the concussion lawsuit settlement—surely a benevolent act of charity in its own right.
There may be cynics who level criticisms at the NFL, but Joe and Jane Citizen agree that the league needs our help. Why else would the public so eagerly shell out our own tax money to finance new stadiums for our local franchises? If the league paid out big money in taxes, it would just go back to the teams to help afford the stadiums anyway. Better to keep things simple.
Still not convinced that this whole non-profit business is all that great of an idea? Well, let's face it—you're just a hater. And Goodell is laughing all the way to the bank.


text:
Web-only apparel retailer Indochino has raised $13 million in capital. The Series B funding round was led by Highland Consumer Fund with participation by existing investors Madrona Venture Group, Acton Capital Partners and Jeff Mallett, the former president and chief operating officer for Yahoo Inc.
Indochino launched in 2007 and has raised a total of $17 million. The e-retailer sells custom suits made from measurements that customers provide via the e-commerce site. The new capital will go toward marketing, product development and hiring management and operations employees, the e-retailer says.
Tom Stemberg, managing general partner at Highland and a co-founder and former CEO of Staples Inc. (No. 2 in the Internet Retailer Top 500 Guide), will join Indochino's board.
"Over the past several years we have seen incredible growth in the world of online to offline fashion," says Kyle Vucko, CEO and co-founder of Indochino. "Consumers are accustomed to the convenience of online shopping, but want something more personal. This funding will help us expand our marketing programs and create new styles that keep our customers coming back again and again."Favorite


text:
Buying Stocks on the Cheap
I like beaten-down stocks with solid dividends. But management counts, too.
When last we left our heroine, she was anxiously waiting for Kiplinger's trading restrictions to lapse so that she could snap up a bunch of bargain-priced blue-chip stocks before too many other investors realized they were being far too dismissive of these great companies.
The market was kind enough to tumble just as the trading restrictions expired, making this Practical Investor feel like a kid in a candy store. Lockheed Martin (symbol LMT) at $76.70? Yes, please! Chevron (CVX) at less than 8 times earnings? Sweet! Apple (AAPL) at $390 and Microsoft (MSFT) at a shade over $25? I bought them all.
Good moves. The timing was fortuitous. From December 12, the day of my latest buys, Apple rose 8%, Chevron gained 6%, Lockheed climbed 4%, and Microsoft soared 11% (all figures are as of January 6 and include reinvested dividends). Over the same period, Standard & Poor's 500-stock index gained 4%.
What about the rest of the portfolio? You can see all of my buys here. (I haven't sold anything yet). But before you start to check up on my performance, you might want to learn how I'm trading and keeping score.
I buy stocks in bunches and measure their performance against Vanguard Total Stock Market ETF (VTI). By looking at this exchange-traded fund, I can see how individual stocks have fared in comparison with a volatile market. Because I launched this portfolio just a few months ago, I have only short-term results to assess. A year from now, we'll be able to make more-meaningful judgments about my picks.
In the meantime, let's see what my picks have done so far. Two of my three initial purchases -- Intel (INTC) and Spirit Airlines (SAVE) -- gained 11% and 4%, respectively; Corning (GLW) fell 2%. My ETF has lost 1% since October 27, when I bought the next group of shares. Meanwhile, Johnson & Johnson (JNJ) was flat, PPL Corp. (PPL) fell 2%, and KKR Financial Holdings (KFN) rose 7%.
So far, three of the ten stocks I've purchased haven't beaten the index. The worst performer -- Corning, a maker of shatter-resistant glass for phones and TVs -- got slammed when the company announced in November that it expected revenues to decline in the fourth quarter. But with the stock, at $14, selling for a bit more than 6 times the past 12 months' earnings per share, it doesn't strike me as a time to get out.
Corning's decline notwithstanding, all of my picks share common themes: I seek to buy good companies when they sell at cheap prices and try to cover my bet by favoring those that pay rich dividends and generate enough cash to pay them. In fact, half of the stocks in my portfolio owe a portion of their return to reinvested quarterly dividend payments that bought me more shares.
But if historically cheap prices and generous dividends are key, why am I not pouncing on a stock such as Hewlett-Packard (HPQ), which sells for less than 7 times earnings and yields 1.8%? Because of the amorphous "governance" aspect of stock selection that I wrote about last month.
A company's board of directors is supposed to serve as a steward of investor assets, overseeing top management and ensuring that shareholder money is well spent. HP's board has proved to be a horrible steward. It has hired lousy executives, then lavished them with millions of dollars after firing them. In 2010, Mark Hurd walked away with $23 million, including $12.2 million in severance. The board fired Hurd's replacement, Léo Apotheker, after just ten months on the job, awarding him a parting package estimated at $25 million.
Most corporate waste flies under the radar. So when it jumps out at you, you know the company's directors can't be trusted with your hard-earned money. In HP's case, that makes an apparently cheap stock not cheap enough.


text:
Get those pages ready! Winners will be announced at Spring Fling 2012.
14th Annual Fire and Ice Contest
Sponsor: Chicago-North RWA
Fee: $25 - $30 (RWA members, non-RWA members)
E-Entry Deadline: Midnight of February 1, 2012
Entries Accepted: December 15, 2011
Eligibility: not published in book-length fiction in last 5 years
Enter: prologue/first chapter (25 pages max)
Final round judges:
Single Title- Celina Summers, Musa Publishing
Series Romance - Megan Long, Harlequin
Historical Romance - Deb Werksman, Sourcebooks
Women's Fiction w/Romantic Elements - Cori Deyoe, 3 Seas Literary Agency
Paranormal Romance - Cindy Davis, The Wild Rose Press
Young Adult - Emily Easton, Walker Books
For More Information: http://www.chicagonorthrwa.org/
or email the contest coordinator at
Chicago-North is my RWA chapter. It's well known as a great critique chapter. Even if you don't win this contest, you stand a good chance of gaining valuable feedback!
|Morgan Mandel
Morgan Mandel's books are all
available on Kindle & Smashwords.


text:
Microbe Magazine
Cover Image
Cover: Colored scanning electron micrograph (SEM) of Clostridium difficile cells. C. difficile, which can cause fatal infections, is one of many human gut inhabitants, populations of which can vary greatly among individuals. Research suggests that gut microbiota might vary with race and may contribute to differing risks of digestive tract diseases, including cancer (see p. 243). (Image © Paul Gunning/Science Source.)
Microbe Magazine, Cover Image
Cover ImageVaccines are crucial for controlling the spread of influenza, but currently are only effective against a limited mix of strains. A universal vaccine remains elusive, but progress is being made (see p. 433). (Image © James King-Holmes/ Science Source.)
Full text loading...


text:
DBI mysql truncation best practice?by eXile (Priest)
|on Mar 24, 2006 at 20:43 UTC ( #539093=perlquestion: print w/replies, xml )
|Need Help??
eXile has asked for the wisdom of the Perl Monks concerning the following question:
esteemed monks,
a mysql insert does some silent conversion of values it inserts into a row, like inserting a string > 255 chars into a column that only takes 255 chars, will insert the first 255 chars. I'd like to know how to detect it when that happens. I've tried looking in various DBI attributes, and mysql specific info, but couldn't find anything that warns me about when this truncating happens:
I've written wrappers around this in the past (ie. fetch values from database and compare these to what was originally meant to be inserted), but there must be a better way. Another way I could handle this is to compare rows values with the table specification beforehand, but both methods involve me doing work that the database should be able to do much better (since it is doing the conversion).
Am I missing something that allows me to easily get some kind of error/warning when this truncating happens? If not, how do other people handle this?
Back to Seekers of Perl Wisdom


text:
"Lost" has just six episodes to go before its much-anticipated conclusion, and series star Daniel Dae Kim says fans won't be disappointed.
"For me it was very satisfying," he told People magazine of reading the final show's script. "After I read it, I had to sit for five or 10 minutes, just reflecting and digesting, because it definitely makes an impact."
Daniel, who plays Jin Kwon, added that the episode ties the complicated show's saga together.
"It's pretty amazing," he said. "If you think about how many pieces the writers had to put together in order to make it fall into place, it's mind-boggling, and they did such a great job. Some of the twists and turns are just so clever."
One twist "Lost" watchers are hoping for is the reunion of island couple Jin and Sun (Yunjin Kim), who have been separated since the explosive ending of Season 4. Though the two seemed to get closer than ever to seeing each other once more on Tuesday night's episode, unpredictable events once again kept them apart. As the finale nears, will they finally find each other?
"Fans of Jin and Sun won't be disappointed," Daniel said.
The two-hour final episode, simply titled "The End," airs on ABC on May 23.
Related Content from AccessHollywood.com:
VIEW THE PHOTOS: 'Lost': The Final Season
VIEW THE PHOTOS: 'Lost' - Scenes From Season Five
PLAY IT NOW: Emilie de Ravin: 'I Was Plesently Surprised' Claire Returned To 'Lost'
PLAY IT NOW: 'Lost' Returns For The Final Season (February 2, 2010)
Daniel Dae Kim: "Lost" Ending is "Very Satisfying"
"Lost" has just six episodes to go before its much-anticipated conclusion, and series star Daniel Dae Kim says fans won't be disappointed.


text:
Do you love to travel as well? Do you spend many hours finding deals? Tired of missing out on the best deals because they disappear so quickly?
Wouldn't it be great to just get the deals you really need via email and text message in real time?
Mighty Travels Premium delivers real time access to all relevant airfare prices and so called error fares before anyone else.
Get up to 90% off regular airfares - most deals are 50% or more off.
We also give you access to so called hotel pricing errors and the cheapest 5 Star hotels anywhere on the world.
Now everyone can afford to fly Business Class and book 5 Star Hotels!
You can travel on fares that cost a fraction of their original price! We monitor Economy/ Premium Economy/ Business Class and First Class deals for you for all the world's 3,000 major airports - 24x7, 365 days a year.
We use artificial intelligence and human intelligence to find all the deals for you.
With the Mighty Travels Premium Dashboard, you can see conveniently and fast all the airfare deals for a whole continent in two seconds.
We analyze 450,000 new fares - every day and find the best deals with our 365-day analysis for you. We have divided the world into 11 departure regions that you can choose from and you can expect about 200-300 new deals (per departure region) every day in your inbox.
It is so good that several airlines have started using our service to screen the competition. Get started with the best airfare intelligence service (since 2014).
Once subscribed you get access to the Mighty Travels Premium Dashboard.
The deal you found turned out to be amazing! LOT Polish Airlines operated brand new 787 Dreamliners - this was a serious coup. Thanks!
This is the best money I have ever spent. It pays for itself hundreds of times over!
I love your site - I wish I could book every deal you sent me - but even retired people need to work sometimes.
Keep up the good work, this service is great!
I have been looking for something like this for Business Class bargains for a long time! Good job!
Great service! I wish I'd have the budget and vacation time for all the deals.
Yes - most subscriptions come with a 30 day free trial.
Yes, we have data for more than 3,000 airports - updated every 5-10 minutes - every day.
No - only one email/ phone number per subscription.
At any time you can cancel your membership in the dashboard.
Yes we offer an API service. Please send us an email to [email protected] to learn more.
Yes we do offer an affiliate program. Please email [email protected] to learn more.


text:
New Jersey's Portion: $32.7 million
Allocation Method: Funds are allocated by federal formula for local distribution to local workforce areas, and additional resources are reserved for statewide services to workers affected by mass layoffs.
The Dislocated Worker Program funds job-preparation initiatives for dislocated workers and provides training and employment opportunities through the One-Stop Career Center System.
Federal Requirements and Restrictions
Workers must be classified as a dislocated worker under federal guidelines.
Program Eligibility
18 years of age or older
- Citizen or legal alien
- Selective Service Registration (Males)
- Classified as a dislocated worker under federal guidelines
Project Prioritization:
Mortgage Foreclosure Prevention: The Governor has established mortgage foreclosure intervention/prevention as an important goal. LWD will target ARRA funds to provide additional services to eligible Dislocated Workers at risk of mortgage foreclosure
- Targeting reemployment opportunities in demand occupations
- Eligible Dislocated Workers will be informed about the new subsidy for continuation of health insurance through the ARRA
Important Program Dates
The ARRA requires that the funding must be spent by June 30, 2011. Federal guidance from the U.S. Department of Labor requires 80% of funds to be obligated by June 30, 2009. As required by the U.S. Department of Labor, New Jersey will submit a State Plan for the use of these ARRA funds to ensure the quickest and most effective use of these funds.
To find your local One-Stop Center, please visit the New Jersey Department of Labor and Workforce Development's website at: http://lwd.dol.state.nj.us/labor/wnjpin/findjob/onestop/services.html