The Kellogg Institute for International Studies and the Potenziani Program in Constitutional Studies hosted the book launch for the book, “Italian Constitutional Justice in Global Context,” on Wednesday afternoon. The book was co-authored by a group of four legal scholars that includes Paolo Carozza, a Notre Dame law professor, and Andrea Simoncini, a visiting fellow and professor of constitutional law at the University of Florence, and focuses on the Italian constitutional court system and the lessons it contains for constitutional legal studies around the world.As part of the launch, Kellogg and the Potenziani Program arranged a panel of speakers who were involved with the writing and editing of the book, including U.S. Supreme Court Justice Samuel Alito and the O’Toole Professor of Constitutional Law, Anthony J. Bellia. Simoncini also spoke on the panel.Alito, who wrote his senior thesis on the Italian constitutional courts, said the Italian court is particularly deserving of study by the English-speaking world.“One of the great opportunities I’ve had is to compare how I do things with other judges and justices,” he said.Simoncini said he and his co-authors realized there was a lack of Italian constitutional study in the English language, which is mainly due to the lack of translations available.“It was surprising to hear decisions from Albania and Zimbabwe talked about and studied, but the Italian counterparts were not,” he said, “I found this to be because Italy did not translate their decisions, and so they had no bearing on matters of global constitutionalism.”Alito said constitutional law procedure differs drastically in courts around the world, and these differences are a mechanism through which the American court system and it’s many unique facets can be evaluated.“Judicial review used to be unthinkable,” Alito said. “Here, in our idea of judicial review, the Constitution is law, but a higher form of the law. If the law clashes with the Constitution, constitutionality is debated and litigation arises.”Alito said this perception of judicial review may be derived from variances in how scholars and philosophers around the world think about rights, but that judicial review holds a very important place in American constitutional law.“Judicial review serves to protect against rights violations in the future,” Alito said.Alito said the idea of using legal precedent to substantiate legal decisions in the Supreme Court has become a topic of much debate by legal scholars, and he believes this practice does not account for differences in value systems between countries.“The point that emerges from looking at different cases, while Europe and America agree on certain values, it is simplistic to rely on counting up foreign decisions,” Alito said.Alito said in the U.S. justice system, there is at least a connection to the democratic process, as elected officials are still held accountable to their constituents for decisions to accept candidates for the Supreme Court or not.“Judges are appointed by an elected president and confirmed by elected members of congress, with only a majority,” Alito said.Alito said this contrasts sharply with other international courts, whose procedure helps to preserve courts as “judicial bodies and not political bodies.”Paolo Carozza, director of the Kellogg Institute for International Studies, said the book was a deeply collaborative venture that was the product of friendly discussion.“We didn’t take different chapters, each chapter was written by four pairs of hands,” Carozza said. “One person would write a chapter and then it was circulated for comments and editing.”Simoncini said the collaborative nature of the book is perfectly suited to the subject matter, as the global community can draw important lessons from comparing their varying modes of operation.“The dialogue between different constitutional scholars was not only the content of our work, but also the methodology,” Simoncini said.Carozza said the way the book was written was exemplar of Notre Dame “as a community of friendship and learning.”He also said the contributions the book will make to the study of comparative global constitutionalism “pales in comparison to the ways in which we, as a University, will impact the world.”Tags: Constitutional Studies, Kellogg Institue, Potenziani Minor in Constitutional Studies, SCOTUS, Supreme Court, U.S. Supreme Court
ShareShareSharePrintMailGooglePinterestDiggRedditStumbleuponDeliciousBufferTumblr Today will examine words that describe the modern business development professional. In the same vein, this is not a scientific or comprehensive list. Rather, it is simply intended as an introductory and 30,000 foot view of terms relevant to business development professionals in the year 2015. As you may recall from an earlier post, the smarmy sales guy is dead.Not-Smarmy. Yes, I realize that is really two words, but there’s a hyphen in between, which helps. Far from the business development person of decades past, the modern business development professional cannot rely solely on a sales emphasis. Today, business development professionals will identify more closely with relationship building and partnership nurturing, over sales. Rather than purely pushing revenue numbers up, today’s business development professional looks to match products and services with potential consumers. Enhanced revenue is a natural byproduct of this re-imagined job function. You must be real, authentic and genuinely able to empathize with the consumer.Civic. In the past, business development professionals worked in silos like boardrooms, back-offices and the occasional golf course. Today, they must strive to be a much more visible element of the communities in which they live and work. continue reading »
The Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals program has been fully restored by a federal court in Maryland on Friday.For the first time in 3 years, DACA will now be open up to new applicants. The program allows immigrants who were brought to the U.S. as children but who lack legal status to legally work and protects them from deportation.President Donald Trump has been trying to end the program since 2017.However, last month, the Supreme Court ruled thatTrump didn’t properly end the program. Immigration attorneys argued that meant the Trump administration had to start accepting new applications, but it doesn’t appear to have done so yet. Trump can still end the program.According to reports, about 650,000 people are enrolled in DACA, but only those who were already in the program when it ended have been able to renew.The Migration Policy Institute, a nonpartisan think tank, estimates an additional 66,000 young immigrants now meet the minimum age requirement of 15 years to apply for DACA and would be eligible under the restored program.The U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services said it is reviewing the ruling.
SACRAMENTO – In the manner the Warriors want him to lead, Jacob Evans spoke in a commanding voice with a mix of self-accountability and defiance about his rookie season.“Last year was disappointing for me. But I don’t really care how anyone else looks at it,” Evans told the Bay Area News Group. “Knowing what I can do on the basketball court, I wasn’t able to do that at the level I know I could.”In the manner the Warriors want him to play, Evans sounded passionate and aggressive toward those …
Dr. Jerry Bergman has taught biology, genetics, chemistry, biochemistry, anthropology, geology, and microbiology at several colleges and universities including for over 40 years at Bowling Green State University, Medical College of Ohio where he was a research associate in experimental pathology, and The University of Toledo. He is a graduate of the Medical College of Ohio, Wayne State University in Detroit, the University of Toledo, and Bowling Green State University. He has over 1,300 publications in 12 languages and 40 books and monographs. His books and textbooks that include chapters that he authored, are in over 1,500 college libraries in 27 countries. So far over 80,000 copies of the 40 books and monographs that he has authored or co-authored are in print. For more articles by Dr Bergman, see his Author Profile.(Visited 682 times, 1 visits today)FacebookTwitterPinterestSave分享0 Some Evolutionists Explain Our Solar System’s Unique Arrangement by Mimicking Velikovsky’s Ideasby Jerry Bergman, PhDA cover story in New Scientist on May 25 discusses the Juno spacecraft, an “audacious mission circling Jupiter’s poles” that arrived in 2016 and is schedule to orbit Jupiter until 2021. In this article, writers Leah Crane and Richard Webb give a remarkable role to the largest planet that has worked out for our benefit. They state that Jupiter is “the biggest and perhaps most important planet in the solar system…. And might even ultimately be responsible for life on the earth.” To understand why, we must look at the solar system as a functioning unit, and not as a haphazard grouping of planets independently operating separately. The study of the solar system as a system has increasingly supported the conclusion that life is not about just being in the “habitable zone,” but is intricately connected with the arrangement of all the other planets.The most well-documented example of interdependence is the research indicating that our moon is required for life on Earth. There are many reasons for this. For example—unlike at Venus and Mars, which both lack a large moon—our moon’s gravitational influence helps to ensure that Earth’s spin axis is stable at an inclination of 23.5 degrees with respect to the plane of its orbit. This results in seasons. As a result, our climate variations have remained very modest throughout Earth’s history. Stabilization of the Earth’s rotation on its axis by the moon allows for a far more stable, life-friendly climate. The Earth’s tilt, called its obliquity, has not varied by much more than a few degrees for most of Earth’s recent history. Obliquity stability is necessary for climate stability, thus for human life.In 1994, Jupiter disrupted Comet Shoemaker-Levy 9 and then absorbed the impacts of all 23 fragments, which would have devastated Earth.Jupiter as a Protective ShieldOne theory is Jupiter, as is believed true of all of the planets, especially Saturn, Neptune and Uranus, helps to protect the Earth from damage caused by asteroids, meteorites and comets. Astrobiologist Kevin Grazier disputes this notion. “It has been widely reported that Jupiter has a profound role in shielding the terrestrial planets from comet impacts in the solar system, ….(a phenomenon often referred to as the ‘Jupiter as shield’ concept).” Grazier’s own computer simulation has challenged this common assumption, but has noted another reason for Jupiter’s importance to Earth. He simulated the behavior of10,000 particles in each of the jovian inter-planet gaps for the cases of full-mass and embryo planets for up to 100 My. The results of these simulations predict a number of phenomena that not only discount the “Jupiter as shield” concept, they also predict that in a Solar System like ours, large gas giants like Saturn and Jupiter had a different, and potentially even more important, role … delivering the volatile-laden material required for the formation of life.Simulation studies are problematic because they make many assumptions when designing the study, such as the need to consider all relevant conditions in the simulation that could influence the outcome.Although Webb and Crane in the New Scientist article do not mention the theory that Jupiter protects Earth from impacts, they agree with Grazier that the planet may have been responsible for sending water to the Earth. The Earth is known as the water planet because it contains far more liquid water than any other planet in our solar system. Nonetheless, many observers still prefer the shield theory for many reasons. One study of the planets finds that, although asteroids, meteorites and comets regularly crash into most of the planets, comparatively few large objects have struck the Earth since its creation. The ‘Jupiter as shield’ explanation argues that most objects that would otherwise strike the Earth are pulled away from the path that allows them to reach the Earth, deflecting meteorites and other large objects.As Crane and Webb correctly note, Jupiter is enormous, 140,000 kilometers across, or close to 11 times Earth’s diameter. It is not only the largest planet in our solar system, but, they claim, may even be one of the largest planets in the known universe that is very distant from its star. Although most extrasolar planets discovered so far tend to be gas giants, they are located very close to their star, unlike Jupiter. We must keep in mind that we have only explored a few planets around a few nearby stars, not the entire universe. Furthermore, if the “Jupiter as shield” theory is correct, some of Jupiter’s 79 satellites contribute to the effect. One of them is larger than the planet Mercury (Ganymede) and two others, larger than the Earth’s moon (Callisto and Io). As a result, even more objects are deflected or absorbed, causing them to miss colliding with the Earth.Additionally, if the “Jupiter as shield” theory is valid, the entire massive set of bodies in the outer solar system plays a significant role in protecting the Earth. This supports Webb and Crane’s observation that Jupiter’s “origin and early history are of huge significance not just for understanding it, but also for the wider history of the solar system.”  The moon’s surface area is only seven percent of the Earth’s surface area, and its effect is not as large as Jupiter’s, but because it is much closer to the Earth, its effect is not, by any means, insignificant.In short, if the shield theory is valid, the Earth is protected from meteorites, asteroids and comets by all of the five planets on the Earth’s far side (Mars, Jupiter, Saturn, Uranus and Neptune), plus the over 100 moons circling these planets, as well as the two planets on the side of the Earth facing the Sun (Mercury and Venus). The charting of the orbits of the planets for decades, indicates that the Earth is in a protected zone, reducing enormously the number of potential extraterrestrial collisions.Sun and planet sizes to scale. Jupiter outweighs all the other planets combined. Credit: Lunar and Planetary Institute.Crane and Webb Had to Mention the Church’s “Persecution” of GalileoWhen discussing astronomy, it seems mandatory to mention the persecution of Galileo. The New Scientist article is no exception. They write when Galileo “discovered four moons circling Jupiter… they were the first bodies conclusively shown to be orbiting a planet other than Earth. That … helped get Galileo into a lot of trouble with the religious authorities of his day.Read our biography of Galileo for more facts about the “Galileo affair.”The “Galileo affair,” allegedly perpetrated by the Catholic Church, may not only be the most quoted example of “persecution” of science by religion, but one of the most misunderstood events in history. University of New Mexico History of science professor Timothy Moy correctly observed thatUnfortunately, Galileo’s trouble with the Church later became a popular archetype for the historical relationship between science and religion. Nothing could be further from the truth. For most of the medieval and Renaissance periods, and even stretching into the eighteenth century Enlightenment, the primary supporter of research and teaching in the sciences was the Roman Catholic Church…. the Church, in the aftermath of the Galileo affair, continued to promote research into evidence for heliocentrism, even to the point of turning entire cathedrals into giant pin-hole cameras to measure the apparent diameter of the solar disk at various times of the year.Galileo’s main problem, what Professor Santilana called his “fatal mistake,” was his “rash indiscretion, his insistence on throwing open to the common people, by writing in the vernacular, a question which was far from being settled.” This year another book was published on this topic, this time by Fulbright scholar Dr. Michael Keas (PhD in the history of science from the University of Oklahoma). In chapter 5 of Unbelievable: 7 Myths About the History and Future of Science and Religion, Keas quotes claims of persecution by leading atheists, showing their claims irresponsibly repeat common beliefs that do not comport with history.Yet, in spite of numerous scholarly studies completed by leading scholars and science historians, the myth of Galileo persists, as is illustrated by the misleading claim in New Scientist quoted above. To many, watching the transit of the four Galilean moons of Jupiter across Jupiter’s surface with a telescope is a very lovely sight to scientists and religious people alike. Such evidence first witnessed by Galileo does not threaten their faith. The transit of Venus, a much rarer event, is both delightful and scientifically informative.The Solar System Designed for Life on EarthThe existing design of the solar system, with rocky planets near the sun and gas giants far away, is ideal for life to thrive on Earth. As far as is known, it is unique anywhere else in the universe. Thus, the Earth appears to occupy a privileged place in the solar system and, as far as known, in the universe as well. The question is, how did it get that way? In attempting to account for the origin of Jupiter and the other planets, Crane and Webb, excluding intelligent design, decided the “only way we can explain the size and disruption of the planets as they now are is if they formed somewhere else and migrated to their current positions. To move whole worlds around you need something to give them a gravitational shove.” This something, they conclude, could only have been the other planets.The Ghost of Velikovsky ReturnsAlthough Crane and Webb do not mention him for good reasons, they presented an idea eerily similar to one of the most derided theories in astronomy— that proposed by Immanuel Velikovsky. Velikovsky’s most well-known book Worlds in Collision was first published in 1950. The book postulates that around the 15th century B.C., the modern planet Venus was ejected from Jupiter and passed near the Earth, ending up where it is today. On its trip to where it is today, Venus altered Earth’s orbit and axis, causing innumerable catastrophes. The details of Crane and Webb’s theory are very different than Velikovsky’s account, of course, but the basic idea is similar. It invokes “Jupiter’s gravitational bulldozing” planets into different positions from where they formed. They call this idea astronomers’ “best guess” for how the planets moved around, producing the solar system existing today.Velikovsky’s idea of the solar system’s formation was treated so poorly in the 1950s and 1960s that the leading American science organization, the American Association for the Advancement of Science, agreed to hold a session on Worlds in Collision, in which Velikovsky was able to take part. Nonetheless, most all of the papers presented at the session were very negative towards his catastrophic views. Velikovsky’s work is frequently cited as a canonical example of pseudoscience. Yet, a team of leading cosmologists at a conference in Nice, France proposed a catastrophic theory of planet formation that is now widely accepted, including drastic rearrangements of planets that led to our present solar system. It reminds one of Velikovsky’s basic theory! What goes around comes around.ConclusionsThe Galileo mission (1989-2003) orbited Jupiter and sent a probe into the atmosphere, but raised even more questions.The main findings of the space probes Pioneer 11 and Voyagers 1 and 2, which gave scientists their first looks at the outer solar system, is that the more we learn about the universe, the more we realize “we are learning a lot about Jupiter … but it’s raising even more questions … [and showing there are] real mysteries still to be revealed….” This is a common reaction in most areas of science, especially astronomy where most of what scientists do is observe and discover, not run repeatable lab experiments like biochemists can. It is becoming clearer as research progresses that the intelligent design explanation, accepted for most of Western history, fits the facts better than the problematic materialistic explanations, which depend on luck.References Leah Crane and Richard Webb. 2019. “Hey, Big Splendour!” New Scientist. 242(3231):34-38, May 25-31. The online version was titled “By Jupiter! How the solar system’s giant made Earth ripe for life.”  Ward, Peter and Donald Browenlee. 2000. Rare Earth: Why Complex Life is Uncommon in the Universe. New York, NY: Copernicus Books. Grazier, Kevin R. 2016. Jupiter: Cosmic Jekyll and Hyde. Astrobiology 16(1):1-20. January. Grazier, 2016. Abstract. https://www.liebertpub.com/doi/full/10.1089/ast.2015.1321. Crane and Webb, 2019, p. 37. DeYoung, Don and John Whitcomb. 2003. Our Created Moon: Earth’s Fascinating Neighbor. Green Forest, AR: Master Books, p. 82. Crane and Webb, 2019, p. 35. Crane and Webb, 2019, p. 36. Gonzalez, Guillermo and Jay Richards. 2004. The Privileged Planet. Washington, DC: Regnery Publishing, p. 115. Crane and Webb, 2019, p. 35. Moy, Timothy. 2001. “Science, Religion, and the Galileo Affair” Skeptical Inquirer. 25(5):43-49, p. 45. Santillana, Giorgie de. 1955. The Crime of Galileo. Chicago, IL: The University of Chicago Press, p. 18. Keas, Michael. 2019. Unbelievable: 7 Myths About the History and Future of Science and Religion. Wilmington, DE: Intercollegiate Studies Institute. Chapter 5 Gagging Galileo. Ronald Numbers (Editor). 2009. Galileo Goes to Jail and Other Myths About Science and Religion. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press. Myth 8, pp. 68-78. Lomb, Nick. 2011. Transit of Venus. 1631 to the Present. New York, NY: The Experiment, pp. 46-47. Gonzalez and Richards, 2004. Crane and Webb, 2019, p. 36. Bergman, Jerry. 2014. “Immanuel Velikovsky and the Worlds in Collision.” Investigator. No. 154, pp. 41-45, 25. January. Sagan, Carl. 1977. “An Analysis of Worlds in Collision” in Scientists Confront Velikovsky, Ed. by Donald Goldsmith. Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press. Gordin, Michael. 2012. The Pseudoscience Wars: Immanuel Velikovsky and the Birth of the Modern Fringe. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press. Crane and Webb, 2019, p. 37.
Share Facebook Twitter Google + LinkedIn Pinterest To say that we were busy the last two weeks would be an understatement. There was an unprecedented amount of replanting that occurred here in northwest Ohio this past week. It is not just in Ohio, it’s throughout the Midwest. It is widespread throughout Indiana, Illinois, Missouri, and Iowa.Everything planted in mid-May was crusted in and a very high percentage of it had to be replanted. On our farm we ended up replanting 20% of our corn and 60% of our soybeans. I’ve never experienced anything like that in my entire farming career. It was very prevalent throughout the whole northwest corner of Ohio. It didn’t matter what the soil type was, or how it was planted, the crusted ground did not allow for emergence in some fields. The seed germinated but it simply could not push through the crust that developed. In counties directly south, it was very common for people making their third attempt at planting. Conditions were such that it was pretty obvious that the crop was not going to emerge and we took immediate action to get the crop established. Soil crusting was the predominant issue in our area, yet very little disease was seen in the emerging plants.As far as insect pressure, there was a little bit of army worm damage in the counties south of us but we didn’t see any in our immediate area. We had many fields where it was a simple decision that the entire field had to be replanted. We addressed those fields first. We also spotted in some fields to add to the stand. I am a firm believer that you have to have a population in place to achieve a desirable yield. We don’t mess around when it comes to replanting. It is too early in the game to be less than satisfied with the emerged stand population. We finished replanting on June 8. It went in great and from what I scouted today, it all appears to have germinated and most of it has emerged as a result of the warm soil temperatures.Many people are sidedressing corn but we stopped because of the dry conditions. With showers in the forecast, we will be at it again next week.Frustration with the weather is one of the things we have to deal with quite often in agriculture. In the middle of May when we finished planting I was on top of the world thinking we had hit a home run. As it turned out we definitely hit a foul ball, but we will step back up to the plate, persevere and overcome.
The world of financial technology is not just hot right now — it is fast becoming a force to be reckoned with. Investment dollars are flowing in at an alarming rate. It is a land grab in which the hottest competition is for the space in Americans’ wallets.Fintech companies are competing to have their debit cards be consumers’ No. 1 choice, even if it sometimes doesn’t make sense for the company to provide this service. In order to lock-up that interchange rate (the charge that covers the handling and risk of card transactions), fintechs are targeting younger consumers. 73% of customers 18-34 said they would be willing to try a card from a tech firm they already use.This information from customers fits the business model, and legitimately adds value to the customer. Offering a debit card is a valid strategy. The revenue associated with interchange (every time a card is swiped, that fintech earns a portion) can be significant for a fintech startup.But with the recent influx of cards — it’s essential to do something unique. “Just another card” is not going to penetrate the zeitgeist.There’s Gold Out ThereTake a look at Acorns, a six-year-old investing and savings company. For every purchase with the Acorns card, the partner retailer will deposit a reward into the consumer’s account. With recent backing from Comcast Ventures, NBCUniversal, and Bain Capital Ventures, Acorns’ valuation skyrocketed to $860 million.But that also highlights the scary thing that’s being whispered around Sand Hill Road. There is irrational exuberance from venture capitalists pushing their fintech startups toward debit cards and that oh-so-beautiful interchange rate. These debit cards — dare I say “fads” — are not based in real use cases. Funding for fintech startups hit $11.89 billion in 2018, the highest in five years. The monetary flood is inflating valuations way too soon in startups’ growth cycles.It’s founders’ responsibility to push back and do the right thing for their businesses, but having venture capitalists pushing that “hot strategy” on their investments is a scary proposition.Positioning for SuccessAgain, if fintech startups wish to embrace the debit card strategy, they need to put some more profound thought behind the offering.Instead of just chasing the latest fad, companies need to truly create the most value for their customers.Here’s how:1. Don’t reinvent the wheel.Charge for the product. Digit, the popular money-saving app, took a lot of heat in 2017 when the company announced it would implement a $2.99 monthly fee. Added features did little to salve angry customers, many of whom said they’d pull their funds. A year later, CEO Ethan Bloch said Digit had helped clients set aside more than $1 billion. Digit made a decision that dramatically shifted the economics and significantly increased sustainability. If a product indeed provides value, consumers will pay for it.2. Provide value through recommendations.If the fintech startup has built significant trust with its user base, recommendations and third-party offers can be a scalable monetization strategy. Credit Karma is a great example of this. Users trust Credit Karma to provide an up-to-date, accurate credit score. This relationship is a perfect platform to suggest credit cards, loans, etc., that all flow from the quality of the user’s credit score. Every card and loan is monetized. Value for the user. Revenue for Credit Karma. Mutual alignment.3. Partner for profit.Find a partner that adds value to your platform, integrate it, and charge for it. Accounting apps are an excellent example of this. Often dependent on free software to run their books, freelancers and solopreneurs generally don’t withhold enough on their taxes. Integrating with a company such as Track could provide a path to additional revenue. Track, one of the first cohorts of nbkc bank’s partner accelerator Fountain City Fintech, uses machine learning to analyze freelancer earnings, differentiate between W-2 income, and withhold taxes. Integrating Track’s application programming interface and charging an additional fee for tax withholding and remittance could be a lucrative strategy.4. Don’t rule out tipping.The “pay what’s fair” model has picked up steam as Aspiration, and many others have brought the standard to the world of fintech. Aspiration’s product is free, and consumers can decide how much they’d like to tip. The information is not public, but according to folks close to Aspiration, the numbers are favorable compared to what similar companies make per customer.There are a lot of dynamics at play that determines which card consumers choose to use for purchases. On average, Americans have 2.6 credit cards. And credit cards generally come with much more significant rewards than debit cards. Consumers are incentivized to use the card that benefits them the most. The likelihood that a fintech startup’s card will have staying power is low.Consumers are fickle, and businesses are hard to build for the long term. The need for fintech startups to develop business models with diverse revenue streams is paramount. What it Takes to Build a Highly Secure FinTech … China and America want the AI Prize Title: Who … Zach Pettet Zach Pettet is VP of fintech strategy at nbkc bank, a community bank in Kansas City, Missouri, and managing director of nbkc’s accelerator, Fountain City Fintech. AI: How it’s Impacting Surveillance Data Storage A Web Developer’s New Best Friend is the AI Wai… Tags:#debit cards#Fintech Related Posts
By Auyanna McBride, AFCPE-FINRA Foundation Military Spouse Fellowship InternWith the cost of groceries on the rise, many families are turning to couponing to save money on groceries. There are several resources that offer great coupons. Some of these include Sunday newspapers, www.coupons.com and the local store/commissary. To save even more money, military families should try to shop at stores that double their coupons and only get items that the family uses. A great way to start a savings program is to take the money saved on coupons and use it to open a savings account. Most stores print the savings from coupons at the bottom of the receipt so their customers can see exactly how much they save using coupons and store specials. This is a great incentive to use coupons even more because the more money people save, the bigger their savings account will grow. For more information about savings strategies for military families, visit the Military Saves Web site at http://www.militarysaves.org/.This post was published on the Military Families Learning Network Blog on August 30, 2013.
PANAJI: The top bureaucracy in Goa, led by the Chief Secretary, was grappling on Friday evening with the finalisation of notices to outlets serving liquor within 500 metres of highways.On December 15, the Supreme Court had banned sale of liquor within 500 metres of highways across the country. On Friday, the apex court said the ban is not limited to retail liquor outlets, and includes bars, pubs and restaurants.The State Finance Secretary, Daulat Hawaldar, told The Hindu that though the government was yet to receive a copy of the SC’s review order, which had given some State-specific relief based on pleas filed by some States, it was clear that no relief has been provided to Goa.The State government was gearing to issue notices to 3, 200 outlets, including retail outlets, shops, restaurants and even wholesale liquor shops, identified by a special committee headed by State Excise Commissioner Menino D’Souza.Earlier in the week, the government had decided to issue notices to only around 789 retailers.
The Defence Ministry on Saturday denied reports of an Army jawan being abducted by militants from his home in central Kashmir’s Budgam district, saying he is “safe”.The family of Mohammad Yaseen, who is posted with the Jammu and Kashmir Light Infantry (JAKLI) Regiment, had on Friday informed the police that some people came to their house at Qazipora Chadoora in Budgam and took him away.Mr. Yaseen was on leave. However, a Defence spokesperson on Saturday said the reports of the abduction of the jawan were incorrect.“Clarification. Media reports of the abduction of a serving Army soldier on leave from Qazipora, Chadoora, Budgam are incorrect. Individual is safe. Speculations may please be avoided,” the spokesperson said in a tweet.An Army official said they are trying to ascertain where the jawan had been on Friday night which prompted his family to approach the police.