Archives January 2020

How To Make Right Decisions

How to Make Right Decisions by Stephen LauLife is about choices — the choices that you make to live the life you want to live. Inevitably, there are good choices as well as bad ones, and that is life. How do you make right choices? It is all in your mind power. It is not what you have got, but how you use it. Your mind power is uniquely yours. Do not compare yours with that of others: it would be like comparing one’s brain with that of Albert Einstein’s. Remember, according to Einstein, everything is relative. The human brain has a great capacity for growth and expansion; that is, most of us use only a fraction of our brains, and there is plenty of room for improvement if we effectively harness our mind power.Mind power is built upon clear thinking. With clear thinking, we make right decisions. But clear thinkers are not born; they have to work at their minds. This is how we make right decisions in our lives.First of all, give yourself plenty of time to make a decision. Of course, there are drastic and dramatic moments, such as an emergency landing by a pilot, that do not afford you the luxury of time to make right decisions. However, wherever possible, give yourself sufficient time to make right decisions.With ample time, you may be able to assemble all the data available to help you make right decisions. Mistakes are often made due to insufficient data available, and insufficient data often leads to wrong or poor judgment of a situation that requires one to make right decisions.Do not jump at the first solution to a problem, even though in your mind’s eye that may be the “perfect” solution. Always look for other options, though they may seem not as ideal initially.Sometimes it is difficult to make right decisions when you do not have previous experience. This is where self-confidence plays a pivotal part. Self-confidence is an attitude, a mindset built upon self-acceptance, irrespective of the outcome of what decision you are going to make. This mindset has at its core value of living in the present moment, which is the essence of the art of living well. The art of living well is always living in the present moment, which is the capability of the mind to see the relationship between the body and the mind. Your mind is uniquely yours, and yours only; while the present moment is real and is timeless. When you are living in the present moment, you mind will not be distracted by thoughts of regrets for past decisions that you made, or thoughts of worries of the outcome of decisions that you are going to make. Living in the present enables you to accept the outcome of whatever decisions that you are going to make. This freedom from anxiety, guilt and remorse will enable you to make right decisions without undue stress. Both self-confidence and self-acceptance play a major role in how to make right decisions.To make right decisions, you must not let your emotions get the better of you. Sometimes your desire for something may influence your decisions. Therefore, it is important to be flexible about what you want or deeply desire.To help clear thinking, it is important that you write down the pros and cons of your decisions so that you can actually “see” them in writing. If you have doubt, it is good to seek second opinions so that you will have an open mind about what others may have to say about your decisions.Even if you are positive about your decisions, sometimes it is good to reflect on all the negative aspects of your decisions; in other words, to validate your decisions by asking yourself the question: “What are some of the reasons that I may be wrong about this?”You don’t have to be a president of a country or a leader of an organization in order to have to make decisions. Knowingly or unknowingly, you make decisions everyday in every aspect of your life, and these decisions may affect your life positively or negatively. Therefore, it is important to make right decisions with clear thinking, self-confidence, and self-acceptance. Living in the present with mindfulness will help you make right decisions.Copyright (c) 2011 Stephen LauFor more information on the art of living well, visit Stephen Lau’s website: The Art of Living Well. Also, go to his web page: Mind Healing to find out how you can use mind power not onlyto healt but also to turn your dreams into a reality.Article Source: eArticlesOnline.com

Australian government concedes the federal budget may be forced into deficit

Wednesday, November 26, 2008

Australian Prime Minister Kevin Rudd has told the House of Representatives that the federal budget may need to fall into “temporary deficit” if the global economic crisis impacts upon Australia further. The Prime Minister said it would draw upon its budget surplus to stimulate growth and jobs.

The Prime Minister said the Australian economy had changed significantly over the past few months and warned that there were hard times to come for many people. Mr Rudd said the situation will worsen before it gets any better.

Mr Rudd said that the government will go into temporary deficit and spend on infrastructure to stimulate growth if required and not to do so would be irresponsible.

“If Australian economic growth slows further because of a further deepening of the global crisis then it follows that Australian Government revenues will reduce further,” he said.

“Under those circumstances, it would be responsible to draw further from the surplus and if necessary to use a temporary deficit to begin investing in future infrastructure needs including hospitals, schools, TAFEs, universities, ports, roads, urban rail and high speed broadband.” He added, “Such action would support growth would support families and jobs and would be undertaken in the national interest.”

If the budget fell into deficit, it would be first time the federal budget has gone into deficit since 2001. Previously, the government has refused to concede the budget would go into deficit, contrary to predictions by economists.

The admission by the government follows claims on the weekend by the Prime Minister that he did not expect the budget would go into deficit “in the current circumstances.” Today Mr Rudd told parliament that the global economic crisis is accelerating.

“The world economy is deteriorating rapidly,” Mr Rudd told parliament.

“The impact of the global financial crisis … has grown from a trickle to a flood. It is now sweeping across the world from China to Chile, from Germany to Japan.”

The government slashed its budget surplus forecast earlier this month by AUD15 billion to $5.1 billion and revised down revenue for the next four years by a further $40 billion. Mr Rudd blamed part of the downgrade to falling commodity prices.

Figures recently released by the OECD predict that Australia will manage to avoid a recession this year; economic growth is predicted to be 1.7%.

Opposition leader Malcolm Turnbull used the Prime Minister’s announcement to attack the Rudd government’s economic credentials. He said any deficit would be regarded by voters to be a failure in economic management.

Mr Turnbull asserted that it is unlikely that any deficit would be temporary. “Experience and history tell us that Labor deficits are never temporary,” he told parliament. “The last Labor deficit lasted for six years. It only came to an end with the election of a coalition government.”

Mr Turnbull said the government had remained focused on inflation for longer than they should have.

“It was the only government in the developed world that was ignoring the global financial crisis…and was declaring its own war on inflation, when much darker storm clouds were on the horizon.”

The Liberal leader took aim at comments made by Finance Minister Lindsay Tanner and Prime Minister Rudd on the weekend that said the budget would not be allowed to fall into deficit.

“Forty-eight hours [later] and that has been completely abandoned,” said Turnbull.

CPSC, ATF warn of dangers of fireworks over US Independence Day celebrations

Sunday, July 4, 2010

Last week, U.S. Consumer Product Safety Commission (CPSC) held a press conference on the National Mall in Washington, DC, warning consumers of the dangers of fireworks, and advising them of safe handling. They were joined by representatives from the the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms (ATF); Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA); the U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP); and other national safety agencies. Fireworks are often used to celebrate the United States’ July 4, 1776 independence from Great Britain. The Fourth of July is a time when many US families get together to celebrate, by holding reunions, picnics, barbecues, baseball games and firework displays; however, celebrations often turn sour due to injury or even death, caused by the mishandling of fireworks. In 2009, nearly 19,000 fireworks-related injuries were treated in hospitals, doctors’ offices and clinics all over the country. Around 9,000 of those were to children aged under 18, and 6,000 occurred during the 30 days surrounding Independence Day.

CPSC chairman, Inez Tenenbaum, said that burns and cuts to limbs, the face and head were the most common injuries, and over half of them were due to firecrackers, rockets and sparklers. The agencies were joined at the news conference by Jason Henderson, who was injured in 2007 after building home-made fireworks. He had found instructions online detailing how to build M-80-style fireworks, and after purchasing the chemicals, began assembling them; however, the mixture exploded which resulted in him losing both hands and his right eye, and shrapnel caused multiple lacerations and puncture wounds to his entire body. “Don’t be the show, go and enjoy the show. I want to get people to move away from putting on their own displays and just go and enjoy the free shows. I mean they are free,” Henderson said. “You might as well take advantage of them while they are there. You can spend time with your family instead of being the one to light them and taking that risk.” Henderson also appears in a public-service announcement recently released by the ATF to YouTube, that shows how he has now been fitted with bionic arms.

Agencies recommend attending community fireworks shows held by city or county officials, which are held in a more controlled and professional environment. Additionally, many jurisdictions outlaw either all fireworks, or certain types, such as rockets and firecrackers.

Fireworks increase demands on fire departments and personnel at this time of year, acting U.S. Fire Administrator Glenn Gaines noted. “Four firefighters [have been killed] as a result of illegal fireworks. Calls to EMS [Emergency Medical Services] and fire departments increased as individuals continue to be injured and burned.” The dry weather and heat that many areas are experiencing also elevate the risk of brush and structure fires. The National Fire Protection Association said that over 22,500 fires started from fireworks in 2008.

Consumers who do purchase fireworks are encouraged to follow the following common sense rules: always read and follow directions; always supervise older children and teenagers if they are permitted to use fireworks; never allow young children to play with or ignite fireworks, child-friendly sparklers and “party-poppers” are a fun and safe alternative for them; keep animals inside or well away from the fireworks, the noise will often scare them; never light any fireworks inside buildings; light fireworks on a smooth, flat surface away from houses, dry leaves, and flammable materials; never ignite fireworks in metal or glass containers; light one firework at a time; move away to a safe distance immediately after lighting a firework; never return to a firework that has not ignited properly; never throw fireworks at another person, animal, or property; do not consume alcohol when using fireworks; keep a bucket of water or a hose in close proximity in case of fire, dispose of use fireworks in the bucket of water; buy from reliable dealers; only use legal fireworks; and follow the laws of your jurisdiction.

Gaza looters destroy Palestine Authority property

Saturday, September 17, 2005

Frenzied destruction of empty Jewish settlements in Gaza by Palestinian looters have marred plans for exploiting those facilities to create much needed jobs for the area.

Greenhouses in Gaza have been partly destroyed as crucial equipment was stripped by the Palestinians. Looters took everything from water pumps, plastic sheets, tubing and equipment. This makes at least one third of the hothouses at least temporarily unusable to feed the families of Gaza and for potential export to Israel.

The facilities were purchased by a group of Jewish-American donors and given to the Palestinian government to encourage economic development. It was initially anticipated over four thousand Palestinians could be given work at the greenhouses, however all offers have been suspended prior to the damage being assessed and repairs arranged.

Making Use Of The 3 D Architectural Rendering Services

Making Use of the 3D Architectural Rendering Services

by

riaexperts

Improvement in technology has made better many aspects of many businesses. With easier communication and more visually enriched displays Flash has changed everything we know about websites. It has made possible the creation of websites that are highly interactive and more informative than ever and have helped businesses in various fields. Architecture, for example has benefitted a lot from the 3D Architectural Designs that are being used more often to make better the user experience and the services offered by the companies by giving realistic images of exteriors and interiors of buildings.

3D Architecture Model is an innovation that has led to rendering of valuable services to the architectural industry. With a three dimensional figure on your screen the animations and illustrations can show you how exactly your work will look like when once completed. Though a little expensive, it is way ahead of 2D animations in terms of user experience and satisfaction. 3D modeling is being largely used in various sectors to give a product a detailed description and a more impressive presentation. With the judicious use of colors, shapes, textures and lighting, it can greatly add to your product description and is best used for architectural projects- be it finished buildings, buildings under construction or landscapes- everything can come to life with 3D Architectural Designs.

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JZshZp-cxKg[/youtube]

The 3D Architectural Rendering Services require both creativity as well as technical proficiency. 3D Architectural Rendering allows you to visualize your building once it is completed and you can choose the colors to be used in the interiors and the exteriors accordingly. As an architect, the 3D Architectural Modeling is of great value as with this you can give your clients a clear picture on what they are spending their money. With the expectations of the clients soaring every day, it is becoming increasingly important to go a step ahead to keep the clients happy. With 3D architectural designs the clients and the architects can have an idea as to how the finished building would look. They can also decide on things like colors of the walls, windows, doors, railings, texture etc.

3D Architectural Designs can help an architect present an impressive presentation to the prospective clients. http://www.flashwebsitedesignexperts.com/ is one of the best options when it comes to choosing 3D Architectural Modeling Company. They have the most creative and technically expert engineers to bring you 3D Architectural Designs that are aesthetically designed to perfection.

With our

3DArchitectural Rendering Services

,your website will get an all-new dimension and increase the appeal and attractiveness of your website. We as an experienced 3D Architectural Modeling Company, offer you an experience beyond imagination.

Article Source:

ArticleRich.com

California’s violent video game ban law ruled unconstitutional by US Court of Appeals

Sunday, February 22, 2009

A U.S. Court of Appeals on Friday has declared unconstitutional California Assembly Bills 1792 & 1793, the California “ultraviolent video games law” that sought to ban the sale or rental of violent video games to minors.

Federal judge Consuelo M. Callahan has ruled that the 2005 statewide ban, which has yet to be enforced, violates minors’ rights under the US Constitution’s First and 14th amendment because even the most graphic on-screen mayhem, video game content represents free speech that cannot be censored without proper justification.

The Court has ruled that there’s no convincing evidence it causes psychological damage to young people. The 3-0 judgment has affirmed an earlier ruling by a U.S. District Court, which barred enforcement of the law on the basis that it was “unduly restrictive” and “used overly broad definitions,” and that the state failed to show that the limitations on violent video games would actually protect children.

In 2005, Leland Yee (???), a California State Senator (in District 8 which includes the western half of San Francisco and most of San Mateo County), Speaker pro Tempore of the Assembly (D-San Francisco/Daly City), introduced California Assembly Bills 1792 & 1793 which barred “ultra-violent” video games from minors under the age of eighteen in California and mandated the application of ESRB ratings for video games.

“California Assembly Bills 1792 & 1793” were commonly called the “ultraviolent video games bills” or simply “video game ban” bills. Bill 1792 banned the sales of such video games while Bill 1793 required signs explaining the regulations on said games to be placed where such were sold. Both bills were passed by the Assembly and signed by Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger into law (AB 1179) on October 7, 2005.

Explicitly, these two bills provided that:

  • AB 1792 will place ultra-violent video games into the “matter” portion of the penal code, which criminalizes the sale of said material to a minor.
  • AB 1793 will require retailers to place M-rated games separate from other games intended for children, and will also require retailers to display signage explaining the ESRB rating system.

Yee, a former child psychologist has publicly criticized such games as Grand Theft Auto: San Andreas and Manhunt 2, and opposes the U.S. Army’s Global Gaming League.

On October 17, 2005, before the effectivity of the challenged Act, plaintiffs Video Software Dealers Association, the not-for-profit international trade association dedicated to advancing the interests of the $32 billion home entertainment industry and Entertainment Software Association, a 1994 US trade association of the video game industry have filed lawsuit (D.C. No. CV-05-04188-RMW) against the defendants Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger, CA Attorney General, Edmund G. Brown, Santa Clara County District Attorney George Kennedy, City Attorney for the City of San Jose, Richard Doyle, and County Counsel for the County of Santa Clara, Ann Miller Ravel.

Plaintiffs’ counsel, Jenner & Block‘s Paul M. Smith has filed a declaratory relief to invalidate the newly-enacted California Civil Code sections 1746-1746.5 (the “Act”), on the grounds that it allegedly violated 42 U.S.C. § 1983 and the First and Fourteenth Amendments.

Plaintiffs have submitted that “the Act unconstitutionally curtailed freedom of expression on its face based on content regulation and the labeling requirement, was unconstitutionally vague, and violated equal protection. California’s restrictions could open the door for states to limit minors’ access to other material under the guise of protecting children.”

By December 2005, both bills had been struck down as unconstitutional, by Ronald M. Whyte, District Judge, Presiding in the United States District Court for the Northern District of California in San Jose, thereby preventing either from going into effect on January 1, 2006.

Judge Whyte has granted plaintiffs’ motion for a preliminary injunction in “Video Software Dealers Ass’n v. Schwarzenegger,” 401 F. Supp. 2d 1034 (N.D. Cal. 2005), and cross-motions for summary judgment, in “Video Software Dealers Ass’n v. Schwarzenegger,” No. C-05-04188, slip op. (N.D. Cal. Aug. 6, 2007).

Similar bills were subsequently filed in such states as Illinois, Oklahoma, Minnesota, Michigan and Louisiana have been ruled to be unconstitutional by federal courts on First Amendment grounds, according to Sean Bersell, a spokesman for the Entertainment Merchants Association.

The defendants, in the instant Case No. 07-16620, have timely appealed the judgment. On October 29, 2008, the appealed case was argued and submitted to the Sacramento, California‘s U.S. Court of Appeals, hence, the promulgation of the instant 30 pages decision (No. 07-16620; D.C. No. CV-05-04188-RMW) by Alex Kozinski, Chief Judge, Sidney R. Thomas and Consuelo M. Callahan (who wrote the court’s opinion), United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit Judges.

In the ban’s defense, Deputy Attorney General for the State of California, Zackery Morazzini has contended that “if governments restrict the sale of pornography to minors, it should also create a separate category for ultra-violent video games.” Edmund Gerald “Jerry” Brown, Jr., California Attorney General, has also argued that “the Court should analyze the Act’s restrictions under what has been called the ‘variable obscenity’ or ‘obscenity as to minors’ standard first mentioned in Ginsberg, 390 U.S. 629. The Court’s reasoning in Ginsberg that a state could prohibit the sale of sexually-explicit material to minors that it could not ban from distribution to adults should be extended to materials containing violence.”

The “Fallo” or dispositive portion of the judgment in question goes as follows:

We hold that the Act, as a presumptively invalid contentbased restriction on speech, is subject to strict scrutiny and not the “variable obscenity” standard from Ginsberg v. New York, 390 U.S. 629 (1968). Applying strict scrutiny, we hold that the Act violates rights protected by the First Amendment because the State has not demonstrated a compelling interest, has not tailored the restriction to its alleged compelling interest, and there exist less-restrictive means that would further the State’s expressed interests. Additionally, we hold that the Act’s labeling requirement is unconstitutionally compelled speech under the First Amendment because it does not require the disclosure of purely factual information; but compels the carrying of the State’s controversial opinion. Accordingly, we affirm the district court’s grant of summary judgment to Plaintiffs and its denial of the State’s cross-motion. Because we affirm the district court on these grounds, we do not reach two of Plaintiffs’ challenges to the Act: first, that the language of the Act is unconstitutionally vague, and, second, that the Act violates Plaintiffs’ rights under the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment.—”Video Software Dealers Association; Entertainment Software Association v. Arnold Schwarzenegger and George Kennedy” – No. 07-16620; D.C. No. CV-05-04188-RMW – Alex Kozinski, Chief Judge, Sidney R. Thomas and

Consuelo M. Callahan, United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit Circuit Judges.

“We need to help empower parents with the ultimate decision over whether or not their children play in a world of violence and murder,” said the law’s author, Sen. Leland Yee, announcing he wanted Edmund Gerald “Jerry” Brown, Jr., the current Attorney General and a former governor of the State of California, to appeal the decision to the U.S. Supreme Court.

“Letting the industry police itself is like letting kids sign their own report cards and that a self regulating system simply doesn’t work. I’ve always contended that the … law the governor signed was a good one for protecting children from the harm from playing these ultra-violent video games. I’ve always felt it would end up in the Supreme Court,” Sen. Yee explained. “In fact, the high court recently agreed, in Roper v. Simmons (2005), that we need to treat children differently in the eyes of the law due to brain development,” he added.

According to Michael D. Gallagher, president of the Entertainment Software Association, plaintiff, the Court’s ruling has stressed that parents, with assistance from the industry, are the ones who should control what games their children play. “This is a clear signal that in California and across the country, the reckless pursuit of anti-video game legislation like this is an exercise in wasting taxpayer money, government time and state resources,” Gallagher said in a statement.

California’s violent video game law properly seeks to protect children from the harmful effects of excessively violent, interactive video games. While I am deeply disappointed in today’s ruling, we should not stop our efforts to assist parents in keeping these harmful video games out of the hands of children.

Entertainment Software Association members include Disney Interactive Studios, Electronic Arts, Microsoft Corp, THQ Inc, Sony Computer Entertainment America, and Take-Two Interactive Software, the maker of “Grand Theft Auto” games.

Judge Callahan has also reprimanded state lawyers for having failed to show any reasonable alternatives to an outright statewide ban against the ultra-violent video games. “Ratings education, retailer ratings enforcement, and control of game play by parents are the appropriate responses to concerns about video game content,” said Bo Andersen, president and chief executive of the Entertainment Merchants Association.

Andersen continues, “retailers are committed to assisting parents in assuring that children do not purchase games that are not appropriate for their age. Independent surveys show that retailers are doing a very good job in this area, with an 80 percent enforcement rate, and retailers will continue to work to increase enforcement rates even further; the court has correctly noted that the state cannot simply dismiss these efforts.”

California was already forced to pay $282,794 to the ESA for attorneys’ fees, money that would’ve helped with the state’s current budget difficulties. Andersen has urged California government officials not to appeal the case. “The estimated $283,000 in taxpayer money spent by the state on this case is so far an ‘ill-advised, and ultimately doomed, attempt at state-sponsored nannyism.’ A voluntary ratings system already exists to avoid the state-sponsored nannyism of a ban,” he explained.

“The governor believes strongly we have a responsibility to our children and our communities to protect against the effects of video games depicting ultra-violent actions,” said Governor Schwarzenegger spokeswoman Camille Anderson adding the governor was reviewing Friday’s decision.

Deputy Attorney General Zackery Morazzini, the state’s counsel in the appealed case, has stressed that “a law restricting sales of violent games is far more effective than industry self-policing, since the technological controls that the court cited as another alternative can be easily bypassed by any kid with an Internet connection.”

According to Jim Steyer, Founder of Common Sense Media, a non-profit organization of 750,000 regular users dedicated to improving children’s media lives, researches have shown that playing these violent video games are detrimental for kids mental and physical health. “The health threat involved with kids playing such games is equivalent to smoking cigarettes,” Steyer said. “These violent video games are learning tools for our children and clearly result in more aggressive behavior,” said Randall Hagar, California Psychiatric Association’s Director of Government Affairs.

The Federal Trade Commission‘s data reveals that “nearly 70 percent of thirteen to sixteen year olds are able to purchase M-rated (Mature) video games, which are designed for adults; ninety-two percent of children play video or computer games, of which about forty percent are rated M, which are the fastest growing segment of the 10 billion-dollar video game industry; the top selling games reward players for killing police officers, maiming elderly persons, running over pedestrians and committing despicable acts of murder and torture upon women and racial minorities.”

Labour grabs poll lead in UK General Election campaign

Friday, April 10, 2015

The approval ratings of UK Labour leader Ed Miliband rose above those of his Conservative opponent, David Cameron, for the first time in this year’s bitterly fought general election campaign. The poll results showed support for the Labour Party was also rising.

A poll by Panelbase yesterday showed Labour six points ahead; a similar survey by Survation for the Daily Mirror showed Labour four points ahead of the Conservatives. This latter poll was mixed for the Labour leader as it showed only 25% of voters were convinced Miliband was suited to the job of Prime Minister while 37% preferred David Cameron, but it also shows that people preferred Miliband’s recent conduct as party leader to Cameron’s. A poll by TNS found a three point lead for Labour.

ComRes polling indicated the eventual outcome of the election is too close to call, projecting the Conservatives with 34% of the vote and Labour 33%.

Following the poll results, the Conservative Party fired a volley of negative remarks towards Labour. Defense secretary Michael Fallon said Ed Miliband would end up signing up for “a grubby backstairs deal” with the Scottish National Party (SNP) which would lead to the cancellation or non-renewal of the Trident nuclear submarine programme. The Labour Party have stated they support the continuation of Trident and will not negotiate on Trident with the SNP.

Fallon’s comments on Trident were backed up by David Cameron.

The Labour Party counter-claimed a deal between the Conservatives and Liberal Democrats had put the cost of Trident renewal up by £1.4bn.

Miliband responded to Fallon’s comments: “Michael Fallon is a decent man, but today I think he has demeaned himself and he has demeaned his office. National security is too important to play politics with and I will never compromise national security.”

Former Labour leader Tony Blair said Fallon’s remarks hinted at desperation: “The Tories were up to their old tricks in their personal attack on Ed this morning. I remember the ‘demon eyes’ poster of 1997. It is always a sign of desperation and it will backfire. It shows how nervous they are of a Labour campaign full of confidence, which is showing that it understands the challenges facing working people and how to overcome them. The more they indulge in these tactics the better we should feel.”

Liberal Democrat Vince Cable expressed his displeasure at Fallon’s remarks, saying it was “an appalling way to conduct the argument”.

The two main parties have also proposed a number of new ideas for policy. Labour’s Yvette Cooper is to formally announce a new policy today to protect 10,000 police officers’ jobs by eliminating elected Police and Crime Commissioners and gun licensing subsidy, and sharing of police back-office services and procurement. The Labour crime and justice manifesto also includes creating a new commission on sexual and domestic violence, banning “legal highs”, and reforming prisons to introduce more education and work for prisoners.

Conservative Cameron pre-announced a proposal to change the rules so workers in the public sector and for companies with 250 employees or more — which between the two is estimated to be around half the work force — would be entitled to three days of paid volunteering leave per year. In prepared remarks, Cameron is to call the move represents the “clearest demonstration of the Big Society in action”. This marks a return of the language of the ‘Big Society’ which had slowly disappeared from use since the last election.

UN Report: Earth ecosystem in peril

Thursday, March 31, 2005A report Tuesday from a United Nations-backed project, consulting more than 1,300 scientists from 95 countries, and written over the last four years, warns that 60 percent of the basics of life on Earth — water, food, timber, clean air — are currently being used in ways which degrade them. Furthermore, fisheries and fresh water use-patterns are unsustainable, and getting worse.

“The harmful consequences of this degradation could grow significantly worse in the next 50 years,” according to a press release from the Millennium Ecosystem Assessment (MA), a massive four-year study begun in 2001.

“We’ve had many reports on environmental degradation, but for the first time we’re now able to draw connections between ecosystem services and human well-being,” Cristian Samper, director of the Smithsonian Institution’s National Museum of Natural History in Washington and a chief architect of the study, told the Christian Science Monitor.

The project’s Synthesis Report, first in a series of eleven documents and published yesterday, explains the objective: “to assess the consequences of ecosystem change for human well-being and to establish the scientific basis for actions needed to enhance the conservation and sustainable use of ecosystems and their contributions to human well-being.”

It then goes on to report on four main findings:

  • Changes over the last 50 years to meet rapidly growing demands for food, fresh water, timber, fiber and fuel, have effected substantial and largely irreversible loss in the diversity of life on Earth.
  • Net gains in human well-being and economic development are offset by growing costs, in the form ecosystem degradation, the possibility of abrupt and unpredictable ecosystem changes, and worsened poverty for some groups. Unless addressed, these problems will substantially diminish the benefits that future generations obtain from ecosystems.
  • Ecosystem degradation could grow significantly worse over the next 50 years, presenting a barrier to meeting UN Millennium Development Goals.
  • The challenge of reversing the degradation while meeting increasing ecological demands can be partially met under some scenarios, but only with significant changes in policies, institutions and practices — changes that are not currently under way.

Walter Reid, the study’s director, speaking at yesterday’s London launch of the report said it shows that over the last 50 years “humans have changed ecosystems more rapidly and extensively than in any comparable time in human history.”

“This has resulted in substantial and largely irreversible loss in the diversity of life on Earth,” he said.

It is unclear what this will mean to future generations or the possible emergence of new diseases, absence of fresh water and the continuing decline of fisheries and completely unpredictable weather.

With half of the urban populations of Africa, Asia, Latin America and the Caribbean suffering from several diseases associated with these problems, the death toll is reaching 1.7 million people a year. Entire species of mammals, birds and amphibians are disappearing from the planet at nearly 1,000 times the natural rate, according to the study. Oxygen-depleted coastal waters and rivers result from overuse of nitrogen fertilizer – an effect known as “nutrient loading” which leads to continuing biodiversity loss.

With the United States’ non-participation in the Kyoto Treaty, former U.S. Senator Timothy Wirth, president of this U.N. Foundation, says “U.S. leadership is critical in providing much-needed expertise, technological capabilities and ingenuity to restore ecosystems.

“We can take steps at home to reduce our nation’s adverse impact on the global environment.”

“At the heart of this assessment is a stark warning,” said the 45-member board.

Home Security Systems: More Than Just Having An Alarm In Place

Home Security Systems: More Than Just Having An Alarm In Place

by

anita bern

It is understandable that you want to protect both your valuables and the security of your loved ones. Installing a home security system is a smart choice, but be prepared to encounter some confusion when choosing between the different types of home security systems. Rest assured, however, that whichever type you chose, you know that you\’ve done the most to secure your home and family!

Security systems that protect a home have surely come a long way from locks and barred windows. Modern technology has made these devices surprisingly sophisticated. Luckily, this sophistication is not reflected too much in their price: affordable prices, in the range of a couple hundred dollars, made these devices relatively common in modern homes.

Some home security companies offer significant discounts just in order to get your business. For under hundred dollars a month, you can pay a home security company to have someone keep an eye on your home day and night. It is a very small price to pay for your peace of mind! In some cases, you can even get a free installation and free equipment when you sign up for a home monitoring service. Besides, just announcing the presence of a security company, protecting your home day and night, can act as a deterrent to a potential criminal threat!

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=r4SUvzdNrhM[/youtube]

Installing a home security system may actually save you money, because some insurance companies are willing to shave your premium if you have an electronic alarm system in place. Taking into account the average national premium, and how much an average electronic alarm system costs – the installation will pay for itself, just in insurance savings, in as little as three years.

There are two main types of security systems that protect your home: monitored alarm systems (video surveillance), and local area systems (so-called \”bells only\”). The latter are the more basic ones. These traditional unmonitored systems have various types of sensors placed in and around the house: for example, they can be hooked up to doors and windows. Some devices of this type will also include motion detectors. \”Bells only\” typically include the use of sound alarm that goes off when the device detects a perceived threat. This will alert you – or your neighbors, if you\’re not at home – of any unauthorized entry, and the loud alarm will scare off the burglars. Some devices of this type will also transfer the information about location and the type of threat to the nearest police department.

Monitored home security systems are the most advanced, and therefore a pricier option. Monitored home security systems include video surveillance, where cameras are connected to a central monitoring system. They serve as video door phone, and for identification and access control, but they can also be used as crime deterrence: their presence signifies that your home will not be an easy target. Just the sight of a video camera is enough to scare away potential burglars! They know that they are more likely to be identified when breaking into a home with a video surveillance, and the video material can be used as an evidence against them. Some types of monitored systems can also sound alarms and alert the police. The company will call your house and ask for a password, and if there is no answer, or the wrong password is given over the phone, they will call the police. When used to protect apartment complexes, they include live monitoring and a trained security guard.

The most important consideration when choosing a security system to protect your home? Using it consistently, and in a manner it was meant to be used! Teach yourself, and each member of your household, how to correctly arm and disarm your home security system. Finally, display the signs that announce that your home is protected by a home security system – that alone will keep most burglars at bay! Having a home security system in place indeed means improved home security!

Make sure that you don\’t become too complacent, though: a security system needs to be regularly maintained and used responsibly. Never reveal the code with deactivates your home security system to anyone. It is still a good idea to always lock your doors and windows when leaving home, and follow other basic home security measures.

SpecialtyAlarms.com

specialize in unique security products, alarms, alerts, monitors, sensors, and other types of

home security devices

.

Article Source:

ArticleRich.com